Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41413698›Full record

ReviewProtoplasma2026

Cellulose-based nanomaterials: innovations in wound healing and regenerative medicine.

Kiran Dudhat, Ishaan Garach, Dhaval Mori

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Protoplasma, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Kiran DudhatSchool of Pharmacy, RK University, Kasturbadham, Rajkot, Gujarat, 360020, India. kichupatel@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6621-1319
Ishaan GarachSchool of Pharmacy, RK University, Kasturbadham, Rajkot, Gujarat, 360020, India.
Dhaval MoriB. K. Modi Government Pharmacy College, Gujarat Technological University, Rajkot, Gujarat, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cellulose-based nanomaterials have emerged as versatile and sustainable biomaterials with remarkable physicochemical and biological properties for wound healing and regenerative medicine. This review provides a comprehensive overview of cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs), cellulose nanofibers (CNFs), and bacterial nanocellulose (BNC), emphasizing their distinct structural origins, preparation methods, and biomedical relevance. CNCs and CNFs derived from plant biomass offer tunable mechanical strength and surface functionality, while BNC, biosynthesized by microbial systems, exhibits superior purity, water retention, and biocompatibility. The review highlights how these materials modulate cellular responses-such as fibroblast adhesion, collagen deposition, angiogenesis, and epithelial regeneration-via biochemical signaling and physical cues. Their use as scaffolds, hydrogels, and composite matrices demonstrates promising outcomes in accelerating wound closure and promoting tissue regeneration. Furthermore, the integration of bioactive agents, growth factors, and antimicrobial nanocomponents has expanded their therapeutic potential. By uniting material science with cellular biology, this review underscores cellulose-based nanomaterials as next-generation platforms for advanced wound care and regenerative tissue engineering.

Indexed as

CelluloseNanostructuresRegenerative MedicineWound HealingAnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsHumansNanofibersTissue EngineeringBiocompatible MaterialsCelluloseCelluloseNano materialsWound healing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.