Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35930422›Full record

ReviewChemical reviews2023

Self-Healing Injectable Hydrogels for Tissue Regeneration.

Pascal Bertsch, Mani Diba, David J Mooney, Sander C G Leeuwenburgh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chemical reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 262 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
262citing 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

262 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

202 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

4 authors.

Pascal BertschDepartment of Dentistry-Regenerative Biomaterials, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 EX Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9188-2912
Mani DibaDepartment of Dentistry-Regenerative Biomaterials, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 EX Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
David J MooneyJohn A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6299-1194
Sander C G LeeuwenburghDepartment of Dentistry-Regenerative Biomaterials, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 EX Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1471-6133

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomaterials with the ability to self-heal and recover their structural integrity offer many advantages for applications in biomedicine. The past decade has witnessed the rapid emergence of a new class of self-healing biomaterials commonly termed injectable, or printable in the context of 3D printing. These self-healing injectable biomaterials, mostly hydrogels and other soft condensed matter based on reversible chemistry, are able to temporarily fluidize under shear stress and subsequently recover their original mechanical properties. Self-healing injectable hydrogels offer distinct advantages compared to traditional biomaterials. Most notably, they can be administered in a locally targeted and minimally invasive manner through a narrow syringe without the need for invasive surgery. Their moldability allows for a patient-specific intervention and shows great prospects for personalized medicine. Injected hydrogels can facilitate tissue regeneration in multiple ways owing to their viscoelastic and diffusive nature, ranging from simple mechanical support, spatiotemporally controlled delivery of cells or therapeutics, to local recruitment and modulation of host cells to promote tissue regeneration. Consequently, self-healing injectable hydrogels have been at the forefront of many cutting-edge tissue regeneration strategies. This study provides a critical review of the current state of self-healing injectable hydrogels for tissue regeneration. As key challenges toward further maturation of this exciting research field, we identify (i) the trade-off between the self-healing and injectability of hydrogels vs their physical stability, (ii) the lack of consensus on rheological characterization and quantitative benchmarks for self-healing injectable hydrogels, particularly regarding the capillary flow in syringes, and (iii) practical limitations regarding translation toward therapeutically effective formulations for regeneration of specific tissues. Hence, here we (i) review chemical and physical design strategies for self-healing injectable hydrogels, (ii) provide a practical guide for their rheological analysis, and (iii) showcase their applicability for regeneration of various tissues and 3D printing of complex tissues and organoids.

Indexed as

Biocompatible MaterialsHydrogelsHumansTissue EngineeringBiocompatible MaterialsHydrogels

Identifiers

PMID35930422
PMCPMC9881015

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.