ReviewNPJ microgravity2023
Space habitats for bioengineering and surgical repair: addressing the requirement for reconstructive and research tissues during deep-space missions.
Review in NPJ microgravity, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progresses in Wound Healing: Integrating Nutrition, Physical Therapy, Traditional and Alternative Medicine, and Novel Technologies.Current diabetes reviews · 2026Review
- Acoustofluidic bioassembly induced morphogenesis for therapeutic tissue fabrication.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Technical and regulatory opportunities and challenges for cell and gene therapies in low earth orbit: a status report.Cell & gene therapy insights · 2025Article
- Exploring New Horizons: Advancements in Cartilage Tissue Engineering Under Space Microgravity.Cureus · 2024Review
- Considerations for oral and dental tissues in holistic care during long-haul space flights.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Numerous technical scenarios have been developed to facilitate a human return to the Moon, and as a testbed for a subsequent mission to Mars. Crews appointed with constructing and establishing planetary bases will require a superior level of physical ability to cope with the operational demands. However, the challenging environments of nearby planets (e.g. geological, atmospheric, gravitational conditions) as well as the lengthy journeys through microgravity, will lead to progressive tissue degradation and an increased susceptibility to injury. The isolation, distance and inability to evacuate in an emergency will require autonomous medical support, as well as a range of facilities and specialised equipment to repair tissue damage on-site. Here, we discuss the design requirements of such a facility, in the form of a habitat that would concomitantly allow tissue substitute production, maintenance and surgical implantation, with an emphasis on connective tissues. The requirements for the individual modules and their operation are identified. Several concepts are assessed, including the presence of adjacent wet lab and medical modules supporting the gradual implementation of regenerative biomaterials and acellular tissue substitutes, leading to eventual tissue grafts and, in subsequent decades, potential tissues/organ-like structures. The latter, currently in early phases of development, are assessed particularly for researching the effects of extreme conditions on representative analogues for astronaut health support. Technical solutions are discussed for bioengineering in an isolated planetary environment with hypogravity, from fluid-gel bath suspended manufacture to cryostorage, cell sourcing and on-site resource utilisation for laboratory infrastructure. Surgical considerations are also discussed.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.