ReviewPolymers2026
Shape Memory Polymers as Functional Platforms for Dynamic Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medical Devices.
Review in Polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Shape memory polymers (SMPs) have emerged as a distinctive class of functional polymers for tissue engineering and regenerative medical devices because they couple programmable shape transformation with the biological, mechanical, and degradation requirements of regenerating tissue. Unlike conventional static scaffolds, SMP-based constructs can be delivered in compact temporary configurations, deployed under clinically relevant stimuli, and recovered into porous, anatomically conformal architectures that mechanically and biologically engage with host tissue. This review provides an engineering-oriented perspective on SMPs as functional polymers, emphasizing how shape recovery alone is insufficient and how regenerative performance emerges from coupled control of polymer chemistry, transition behavior, recovery force, fixity, degradation kinetics, and cytocompatibility. Material platforms ranging from biodegradable polyesters and polyurethanes to hydrogels, natural-polymer composites, and dynamic covalent networks are compared in terms of their ability to support tissue-specific functions including minimally invasive deployment, self-fitting, mechanical conditioning, and staged remodeling. The review further discusses 4D-printed patient-specific architectures and translational barriers, including sterilization, packaging, fatigue, manufacturing reproducibility, and regulatory validation. Together, these perspectives reframe SMPs from shape-recovery materials into integrated regenerative engineering platforms guiding the next generation of dynamic polymeric biomaterials.
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.