4.3 Article

Biomimetic scaffold design for functional and integrative tendon repair

期刊

JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 266-277

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.11.016

关键词

Tendon; bone; interface; insertion; nanofiber; hydroxyapatite; biomimetic; tissue engineering

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, New York Stem Cell Initiative [AR052402, AR056459, AR055280]
  2. National Science Foundation [GK-12 0338329]
  3. National Science and Engineering Council of Canada (NSERC) [GS-D3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rotator cuff tears represent the most common shoulder injuries in the United States. The debilitating effect of this degenerative condition coupled with the high incidence of failure associated with existing graft choices underscores the clinical need for alternative grafting solutions. The 2 critical design criteria for the ideal tendon graft would require the graft to not only exhibit physiologically relevant mechanical properties but also be able to facilitate functional graft integration by promoting the regeneration of the native tendon-to-bone interface. Centered on these design goals, this review will highlight current approaches to functional and integrative tendon repair. In particular, the application of biomimetic design principles through the use of nanofiber- and nanocomposite-based scaffolds for tendon tissue engineering will be discussed. This review will begin with nanofiber- based approaches to functional tendon repair, followed by a section highlighting the exciting research on tendon-to-bone interface regeneration, with an emphasis on implementation of strategic biomimicry in nanofiber scaffold design and the concomitant formation of graded multi-tissue systems for integrative soft-tissue repair. This review will conclude with a summary and discussion of future directions. Level of evidence: Review Article. (C) 2012 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据