4.4 Article

Conductive Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering: Current State and Future Outlook

期刊

JOURNAL OF FUNCTIONAL BIOMATERIALS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jfb13010001

关键词

conductive biomaterials; bone tissue engineering; piezoelectricity; bone regeneration; electrical cell response; bone scaffolds

资金

  1. MTF Biologics, 2020 MTF Biologics Junior Research Grant Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bone tissue engineering aims to regenerate lost bone tissue using scaffolds and conductive materials. These materials have shown great potential in improving cellular responses and enhancing regeneration outcomes through their bioactivity and mechanical properties.
Bone tissue engineering strategies attempt to regenerate bone tissue lost due to injury or disease. Three-dimensional (3D) scaffolds maintain structural integrity and provide support, while improving tissue regeneration through amplified cellular responses between implanted materials and native tissues. Through this, scaffolds that show great osteoinductive abilities as well as desirable mechanical properties have been studied. Recently, scaffolding for engineered bone-like tissues have evolved with the use of conductive materials for increased scaffold bioactivity. These materials make use of several characteristics that have been shown to be useful in tissue engineering applications and combine them in the hope of improved cellular responses through stimulation (i.e., mechanical or electrical). With the addition of conductive materials, these bioactive synthetic bone substitutes could result in improved regeneration outcomes by reducing current factors limiting the effectiveness of existing scaffolding materials. This review seeks to overview the challenges associated with the current state of bone tissue engineering, the need to produce new grafting substitutes, and the promising future that conductive materials present towards alleviating the issues associated with bone repair and regeneration.

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

4.4
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