4.7 Review

Current Strategies for the Regeneration of Skeletal Muscle Tissue

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22115929

Keywords

skeletal muscle cells; tissue engineering; hydrogels; scaffold topographies

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  2. Open Access Publishing Fund of the University of Tubingen

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article summarizes the complex process of skeletal muscle regeneration, as well as different cell types and biomaterial strategies currently used to treat skeletal muscle injuries and promote repair. The importance of topography in creating functional striated muscle fibers is emphasized, along with discussions on novel methods for muscle regeneration and future challenges in clinical implementation.
Traumatic injuries, tumor resections, and degenerative diseases can damage skeletal muscle and lead to functional impairment and severe disability. Skeletal muscle regeneration is a complex process that depends on various cell types, signaling molecules, architectural cues, and physicochemical properties to be successful. To promote muscle repair and regeneration, various strategies for skeletal muscle tissue engineering have been developed in the last decades. However, there is still a high demand for the development of new methods and materials that promote skeletal muscle repair and functional regeneration to bring approaches closer to therapies in the clinic that structurally and functionally repair muscle. The combination of stem cells, biomaterials, and biomolecules is used to induce skeletal muscle regeneration. In this review, we provide an overview of different cell types used to treat skeletal muscle injury, highlight current strategies in biomaterial-based approaches, the importance of topography for the successful creation of functional striated muscle fibers, and discuss novel methods for muscle regeneration and challenges for their future clinical implementation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available