3.8 Review

A Review of Decellularized Extracellular Matrix Biomaterials for Regenerative Engineering Applications

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s40883-018-0080-0

Keywords

Acellular matrix; Cell-secreted matrix; Scaffold; Tissue engineering; Decellularization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biomaterials are a cornerstone technology of the biomedical device, tissue engineering, and regenerative medicine industries. While traditional biomaterials are fully defined synthetics, growing evidence supports the use of extracellular matrix-based biomaterials produced through the decellularization of organs, tissues, or cell cultures. These materials are particularly advantageous as they largely retain the structure and the biochemical nature of the original tissue, properties that are often difficult to reproduce with synthetics. Indeed, there are many FDA-approved and clinically used extracellular matrix-based materials that are generated through decellularization processes. In this review, we first describe methods of decellularization used to produce these materials and their associated advantages and limitations, discuss the current use of extracellular matrix-based materials in regenerative engineering applications, describe the areas where current research is occurring, and forecast areas where impactful research may appear.Lay SummaryThe regeneration of tissues often requires a scaffold material to support and guide the cells that are performing the repair. Often, these materials are manmade and lack many of the key features present in native tissue. However, a tissue can be processed to remove its cells (a process called decellularization), leaving behind a scaffold of proteins and polysaccharides known as the extracellular matrix. These decellularized matrices are attractive scaffolds for use in regenerative medicine applications, and they are the subject of this review.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available