ArticlePlastic and aesthetic research2025
Strategies for Craniofacial Tissue Engineering: Innovations for Scalable Bone Regeneration.
Article in Plastic and aesthetic research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hydrogen releasing biomaterials for bone regeneration: mechanisms, design strategies, and applications.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- Hydrogel delivery of demineralized bone matrix augmented with ROS-triggered biomineralization and Trb3 activation for enhanced bone regeneration.Biomaterials · 2027Article
- Mechanisms and therapeutic potential of mitochondrial-targeted therapies in bone repair.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Physicochemically-guided immunomodulatory biomaterials for regulating immune responses in rheumatoid arthritis.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Digital Workflow in Craniofacial Bone Tissue Engineering: From Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) to Personalized Bioceramic Implants.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Advances in biomaterials and technologies applied in craniofacial regeneration.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Article
- A Dual-Bioresponsive and Programmable Microneedle Matrix as a Bioinspired Coupler for Orchestrating Diabetic Bone Regeneration.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Article
- Cholesterol-driven mitochondrial rejuvenation by quercetin nanotherapeutics restores implant osseointegration in diabetes.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- High-Performance Prevascularized SHED-Laden rGO@Hydrogel Achieves Optimized Diabetic Bone Defect Repair.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Adjunctive Therapies in Long-Bone Distraction Osteogenesis: Clinical Evidence for Biophysical and Biologic Treatment Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Cotton-Type Nanofiber Guided Pathway Engineering Enables Rapid Tissue Integration and Accelerated Bone Regeneration in Mineral Powder-Based Bone Grafts.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Flavonoids ofPreventive nutrition and food science · 2026Article
- Innovations in Implant Osseointegration: Biomaterials, Surface Engineering, and Translational Strategies.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2026Review
- Development of a Dual-Drug-Loaded Bone Cement with Osteogenic Potential and Antibiotic Release.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Article
- Neuroimmune regulation of post-traumatic bone regeneration: focus on inflammatory switching and functional recovery.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Progressing Regenerative Medicine: Integrating Bioprinting Platforms for Stem Cell Applications.Stem cells international · 2026Review
- Application and Progress of Loading Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Craniofacial tissue engineering offers promising solutions for addressing large bone defects caused by congenital abnormalities, trauma, or disease. Traditional approaches, such as autografts and synthetic materials, are widely used but face limitations, including donor site morbidity, immune rejection, and poor graft integration. Recent advancements in biomaterials, including nanoscale scaffold design, bioceramics, cell-laden hydrogels, and bioactive modifications, present promising strategies to replicate the biological, mechanical, and structural properties of native bone. This review explores innovative strategies to enhance osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, and osteogenicity of engineered grafts, including the use of advanced biomaterials, immunomodulatory scaffolds, and bioprinting technologies. Key biological challenges are discussed alongside translational barriers. Future directions emphasize the integration of bioprinted, vascularized, multi-phasic tissues, alongside personalized therapies and advanced fabrication techniques, to accelerate clinical adoption. By bridging nanoscale innovations with the demands of large-scale clinical application, this review outlines pathways toward scalable, personalized, and clinically effective solutions to restore functionality and aesthetics in craniofacial reconstruction.
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.