4.6 Review

Electrospun anisotropic architectures and porous structures for tissue engineering

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY B
Volume 3, Issue 27, Pages 5389-5410

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5tb00472a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51373082, 11404181]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2014EMM010, ZR2013EMQ003]
  3. Taishan Scholars Program of Shandong Province [ts20120528]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province for Distinguished Young Scholars [JQ201103]
  5. National Key Basic Research Development Program of China [2012CB722705]
  6. Project of Shandong Province Higher Educational Science and Technology Program [J13LJ07]
  7. Program for Scientific Research Innovation Team in Colleges and Universities of Shandong Province

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to design scaffolds for tissue engineering with proper architectures, organization and properties, a variety of materials and technologies are being developed. In addition to being biocompatible both in their bulk and degraded forms, scaffolds should not only possess appropriate mechanical properties to provide a suitable stress environment, but also be porous and permeable to permit the ingress of cells and nutrients. In this review, we aim to summarize recent advances in electrospun anisotropic architectures such as aligned fibrous arrays, fibrous yarns and bundles, fibrous tubular structures, and porous structures, as well as their formation mechanisms and mechanical properties. In particular, the potential applications of these structure-controlled fibrous constructs in neural regeneration, vascular grafts, cardiac tissue, skeletal muscle regeneration, tendon repair, and cornea repair are presented. Moreover, the current challenges and future opportunities for the use of these scaffolds in research and clinical practice are proposed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available