ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Recent advances in gradient biomimetic scaffolds for tendon-bone interface regeneration.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 3D-printed scaffold-based strategies for enthesis regeneration: a systematic review of the literature.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Pooled it
- Engineering a biomimetic multiphasic suture anchor system for enhanced rotator cuff enthesis regeneration.Science advances · 2026Article
- Programmable continuous gradient bioprinting for engineering spatially heterogeneous microenvironments.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Strontium‑based metal‑organic framework/alendronate‑silk fibroin hydrogels promote tendon‑bone interface healing.Molecular medicine reports · 2026Article
- Priming of Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Tendon Regeneration: Mechanisms and Clinical Translation.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
- Stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted constructs for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration: Shape-morphing mechanisms, cell-laden bioink engineering, and preclinical outcomes.Regenerative therapy · 2026Review
- 3D-bioprinting for joint regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Biomimetic Scaffolds and Extracellular Matrix-Based Strategies for Myofiber Regeneration in Volumetric Muscle Loss.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- Implications of Tissue Engineering for Tendon Repair and Regeneration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Injury and repair of the tendon-bone interface (TBI) pose a significant challenge in the fields of orthopedics and sports medicine. Due to the gradients in structure, composition, mechanical properties, and biological signals across the TBI, transitioning from flexible tendon to rigid bone, traditional surgical approaches often struggle to reconstruct its functional structure, leading to poor mechanical properties of the interface after repair and high re-tear rates. In contrast, gradient biomimetic scaffolds, by mimicking the continuous gradients of native TBI, offer an effective solution for achieving functional TBI regeneration. This review systematically summarizes the research progress of gradient biomimetic scaffolds for TBI regeneration in recent years. Firstly, we discuss the fine structure, physiological functions of native TBI, and the repair challenges faced after its injury, emphasizing the necessity of reconstructing gradient structures. Subsequently, it focuses on the design principles and core biomimetic strategies of gradient biomimetic scaffolds, discussing in depth the principles of construction and implementation strategies for physical structure gradients (e.g., porosity, fiber orientation, mechanical modulus), chemical composition gradients (e.g., degree of mineralization, polymer/ECM components), and biological signal gradients (e.g., growth factors, genes). Building upon this, this review comprehensively reviews various biomaterials for gradient scaffold construction, including natural polymers (collagen, silk fibroin, chitosan, etc.), synthetic polymers (PCL, PLGA, PU, etc.), and inorganic bioactive materials (calcium phosphate ceramics, bioactive glass), analyzing their characteristics, functionalization methods, and applications in gradient construction. Furthermore, this review also systematically summarizes and compares major fabrication techniques for gradient biomimetic scaffolds, particularly the advantages and limitations of electrospinning and additive manufacturing (3D printing) in constructing specific gradient features, and highlights emerging techniques such as microfluidics. Finally, building upon the summarized existing research findings, this review critically analyzes the key challenges and technical bottlenecks currently facing gradient biomimetic scaffolds regarding structural biomimetic accuracy, spatio-temporal control of biological functions, vascularization, and immunocompatibility, and offers perspectives on future research directions, such as smart scaffolds, integration of multiple gradients, personalized manufacturing, and clinical translation strategies.
Indexed as
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.