Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35547166›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Decellularization in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine: Evaluation, Modification, and Application Methods.

Afarin Neishabouri, Alireza Soltani Khaboushan, Faezeh Daghigh, Abdol-Mohammad Kajbafzadeh, Masoumeh Majidi Zolbin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 135 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
135citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

135 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Tracheal Tissue Engineering: Advances and Challenges.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

75 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Afarin NeishabouriPediatric Urology and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Children's Medical Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Alireza Soltani KhaboushanPediatric Urology and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Children's Medical Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Faezeh DaghighDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.
Abdol-Mohammad KajbafzadehPediatric Urology and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Children's Medical Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Masoumeh Majidi ZolbinPediatric Urology and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Children's Medical Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reproduction of different tissues using scaffolds and materials is a major element in regenerative medicine. The regeneration of whole organs with decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM) has remained a goal despite the use of these materials for different purposes. Recently, decellularization techniques have been widely used in producing scaffolds that are appropriate for regenerating damaged organs and may be able to overcome the shortage of donor organs. Decellularized ECM offers several advantages over synthetic compounds, including the preserved natural microenvironment features. Different decellularization methods have been developed, each of which is appropriate for removing cells from specific tissues under certain conditions. A variety of methods have been advanced for evaluating the decellularization process in terms of cell removal efficiency, tissue ultrastructure preservation, toxicity, biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mechanical resistance in order to enhance the efficacy of decellularization methods. Modification techniques improve the characteristics of decellularized scaffolds, making them available for the regeneration of damaged tissues. Moreover, modification of scaffolds makes them appropriate options for drug delivery, disease modeling, and improving stem cells growth and proliferation. However, considering different challenges in the way of decellularization methods and application of decellularized scaffolds, this field is constantly developing and progressively moving forward. This review has outlined recent decellularization and sterilization strategies, evaluation tests for efficient decellularization, materials processing, application, and challenges and future outlooks of decellularization in regenerative medicine and tissue engineering.

Indexed as

decellularizalionextracellular matrixrecellularizationregenerative medicinetissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID35547166
PMCPMC9081537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.