ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025
Implications of Tissue Engineering for Tendon Repair and Regeneration.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Biomechanical Behavior of Selected Achilles Tendon Revision Constructs: An Exploratory Cadaveric Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advanced additive manufacturing in orthopedics: a comprehensive review of biomaterials, structural design, biological functions and clinical technology applications.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Advanced materials and devices strategies of mechanical stimulation for tissue regeneration.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Review
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
Tendon injuries affect millions of people globally and are among the most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions, frequently resulting in chronic pain, reduced mobility, and functional impairment. While conservative and surgical treatments are available, limitations such as low healing capacity, scar formation, and reduced biomechanics necessitate alternative approaches. Tissue engineering offers a promising solution by combining cells, scaffolds, and bioactive molecules to regenerate tendon tissue. This review presents key concepts and emerging trends, highlighting the cellular components, scaffold materials, and manufacturing processes. Tenocytes and mesenchymal stem cells are fundamental for tissue regeneration, as they synthesize extracellular matrix components and regulate inflammatory responses. Various natural and synthetic polymers have been fabricated into scaffolds that mimic the structure and biomechanics of natural tendons. Composite and hybrid scaffolds are utilized to improve the biocompatibility of natural materials with the mechanical stability of synthetic materials. Advanced technologies, such as electrospinning, freeze-drying, and 3D bioprinting, enable the creation of scaffolds with defined architecture and functional gradients, improving cell alignment, differentiation, and tendon-bone integration. Although promising preclinical data exists, major challenges remain in translating these strategies clinically, particularly vascularization, immune rejection, and mechanical stability. Continued interdisciplinary attempts in biomaterials science, cellular biology, and engineering are crucial to advancing clinically viable tendon tissue engineering.
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.