Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40278238›Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025

Commercial Biomaterial-Based Products for Tendon Surgical Augmentation: A Scoping Review on Currently Available Medical Devices.

Marta Pluchino, Leonardo Vivarelli, Gianluca Giavaresi, Dante Dallari, Marco Govoni

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Marta PluchinoReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery and Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-4353-1657
Leonardo VivarelliReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery and Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1112-0262
Gianluca GiavaresiSurgical Science and Technologies, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7843-5969
Dante DallariReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery and Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0595-5477
Marco GovoniReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery and Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1876-8101

Funding

Italian Ministry of Health 5x1000 funding, year 2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tendon defect is one of the common clinical diseases related to the growing population mean age and the number of athletes. Due to an increasing demand for tendon repair surgical interventions, several tendon augmentation products, capable of guaranteeing the necessary biological and visco-elasticity properties and mechanical support, have been developed. In this regard, commercially available products may be grouped into three main categories: (i) natural, (ii) synthetic, and (iii) hybrid biomaterial-based products. Firstly, to better define the research area of this work, common search engines were employed to acquire information from reports or website portfolios of important competitors in the global tendon repair market. Secondly, public registries and bibliographic databases were also employed to analyse data from registered clinical trials and published clinical studies performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of each product. Ten new products have been launched on the market in the last fifteen years: advantages, disadvantages, and future perspectives regarding their use for tendon augmentation treatment are discussed. Although hybrid biomaterial-based products may be considered as more oriented to the new frontiers of tendon augmentation technology, future improvements, especially focused on both mechanical properties and biocompatibility, are needed. However, scientific innovations must navigate convoluted clinical regulatory paths, which, due to high costs for investors, long development timelines, and funding shortages, hinder the translation of many scientific discoveries into routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

hybrid biomaterialsmedical devicesnatural biomaterialssynthetic biomaterialstendon augmentationtendon repair

Identifiers

PMID40278238
PMCPMC12027623

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.