Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39911939›Full record

ReviewJournal of tissue engineering

Advances in tissue engineering of peripheral nerve and tissue innervation - a systematic review.

Jayson Sueters, Rowan van Heiningen, Ralph de Vries, Zeliha Guler, Judith Huirne, Theo Smit

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of tissue engineering. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Journal of tissue engineering
    Review
  6. 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

6 authors.

Jayson SuetersDepartment of Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC - location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5408-6602
Rowan van HeiningenDepartment of Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC - location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ralph de VriesMedical Library, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Zeliha GulerAmsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Judith HuirneDepartment of Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC - location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Theo SmitDepartment of Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC - location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although various options are available to treat injured organs and peripheral nerves, none is without limitations. Auto- and allografts are the first choice of treatment, but tissue survival or functionality is not guaranteed due to often limited vascular and neural networks. In response, tissue-engineered solutions have been developed, yet clinical translations is rare. In this study, a systematic review was performed on tissue-engineered advancements for peripheral nerves and tissues, to aid future developments in bridging the gap toward the clinic by identifying high-potential solutions and unexplored areas. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus until November 9, 2023. Search terms involved "tissue engineering," "guided," "tissue scaffold," and "tissue graft," together with "innervation" and "reinnervation." Original in vivo or in vitro studies meeting the inclusion criteria (tissue-engineered peripheral nerve/innervation of tissue) and no exclusion criteria (no full text available; written in foreign language; nonoriginal article; tissue-engineering of central nervous system; publication before 2012; insufficient study quality or reproducibility) were assessed. A total of 68 out of 3626 original studies were included. Data extraction was based on disease model, cell origin and host species, biomaterial nature and composition, and external stimuli of biological, chemical or physical origin. Although tissue engineering is still in its infancy, explored innervation strategies of today were highlighted with respect to biomaterials, cell types, and external stimuli. The findings emphasize that natural biomaterials, pre-seeding with autologous cell sources, and solutions for reproductive organs are beneficial for future research. Natural biomaterials possess important cues required for cell-material interaction and closely resemble native tissue in terms of biomechanical, geometrical and chemical composition. Autologous cells induce biomaterial functionalization. As these solutions pose no risk of immunorejection and have demonstrated good outcomes, they are most likely to fulfill the clinical demands.

Indexed as

Biomaterialsinnervationperipheral nervessignaling factorstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID39911939
PMCPMC11795627

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.