ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Advanced Biomaterials for Craniofacial Tissue Regeneration: From Fundamental Mechanism to Translational Applications-A Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Vertical and Horizontal Ridge Augmentation with Titanium-Reinforced Dense PTFE and Reinforced PTFE Mesh: A Prospective Comparative Case Series.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Biodegradable Metals and Corrosion Control: Challenges, Limits and New Opportunities for Innovating in Orthopedic Fixations.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Approaching Scarless Wound Healing: From Passive Anti-Fibrotic to Proactive and Programmable Pro-Regenerative Strategies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Biomaterial physicochemical properties govern immune activation and bone regeneration: a titanium-focused design-oriented osteoimmunological framework.Frontiers in immunology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in biomaterials, immunomodulation, stem cell therapy, and biofabrication are reshaping maxillofacial surgery, shifting reconstruction paradigms toward biologically integrated and patient-specific tissue regeneration. This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of current and emerging strategies for bone and soft-tissue regeneration in the craniofacial region, with particular emphasis on bioactive ceramics, biodegradable polymers, hybrid composites, and stimuli-responsive smart materials. We further examine translational technologies such as extracellular vesicles, decellularized extracellular matrices, organoids, and 3D bioprinting, highlighting key challenges such as bioink standardization, perfusion limitations, and regulatory classification. Maxillofacial surgery is positioned for a paradigm shift toward personalized, biologically active, and clinically scalable regenerative solutions.
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.