Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37901157›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in chemistry2023

How to fix a broken heart-designing biofunctional cues for effective, environmentally-friendly cardiac tissue engineering.

Aleksandra Benko, Thomas J Webster

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Application of pulsed electric field technology to skin engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
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

2 authors.

Aleksandra BenkoAGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland.
Thomas J WebsterDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiovascular diseases bear strong socioeconomic and ecological impact on the worldwide healthcare system. A large consumption of goods, use of polymer-based cardiovascular biomaterials, and long hospitalization times add up to an extensive carbon footprint on the environment often turning out to be ineffective at healing such cardiovascular diseases. On the other hand, cardiac cell toxicity is among the most severe but common side effect of drugs used to treat numerous diseases from COVID-19 to diabetes, often resulting in the withdrawal of such pharmaceuticals from the market. Currently, most patients that have suffered from cardiovascular disease will never fully recover. All of these factors further contribute to the extensive negative toll pharmaceutical, biotechnological, and biomedical companies have on the environment. Hence, there is a dire need to develop new environmentally-friendly strategies that on the one hand would promise cardiac tissue regeneration after damage and on the other hand would offer solutions for the fast screening of drugs to ensure that they do not cause cardiovascular toxicity. Importantly, both require one thing-a mature, functioning cardiac tissue that can be fabricated in a fast, reliable, and repeatable manner from environmentally friendly biomaterials in the lab. This is not an easy task to complete as numerous approaches have been undertaken, separately and combined, to achieve it. This review gathers such strategies and provides insights into which succeed or fail and what is needed for the field of environmentally-friendly cardiac tissue engineering to prosper.

Indexed as

bioactivitybiofuctionalitycardiac tissue bioengineeringCVD (cardio vascular disease)electrostimulation in vitrogreen designgreen materialsmechanostimulation

Identifiers

PMID37901157
PMCPMC10602933

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.