Abstract
In situ tissue regeneration can be defined as the implantation of tissue-specific biomaterials (by itself or in combination with cells and/or biomolecules) at the tissue defect, taking advantage of the surrounding microenvironment as a natural bioreactor. Up to now, the structures used were based on particles or gels. However, with the technological progress, the materials’ manipulation and processing has become possible, mimicking the damaged tissue directly at the defect site. This paper presents a comprehensive review of current and advanced in situ strategies for tissue regeneration. Recent advances to put in practice the in situ regeneration concept have been mainly focused on bioinks and bioprinting techniques rather than the combination of different technologies to make the real in situ regeneration. The limitation of conventional approaches (e.g., stem cell recruitment) and their poor ability to mimic native tissue are discussed. Moreover, the way of advanced strategies such as 3D/4D bioprinting and hybrid approaches may contribute to overcome the limitations of conventional strategies are highlighted. Finally, the future trends and main research challenges of in situ enabling approaches are discussed considering in vitro and in vivo evidence.
Highlights
Every year, millions of people around the world suffer from tissue damage, either due to disease, trauma, or aging (Badylak and Nerem, 2010; O’Brien, 2011)
This review provides a perspective on the potential and state of development of different in situ fabrication technologies for multiple tissue regeneration, such as non-computer-based approaches and computer-based approaches
Time is a very important parameter, since the prolonged fabrication associated with the scaling-up of large extensions of tissue might compromise its feasibility in the surgical room with consequences on cell viability, in case of a cellladen approach
Summary
Millions of people around the world suffer from tissue damage, either due to disease, trauma, or aging (Badylak and Nerem, 2010; O’Brien, 2011). As our understanding of how the physical and chemical properties of the ECM direct stem cell fate and tissue formation has evolved, we have observed a simultaneous development of advanced biomaterials with the capacity to recapitulate such properties locally at the tissue interface (Stuart et al, 2010; Dhowre et al, 2015) These smart materials can be dynamically altered by chemistry, enzymes, light, and mechanics, among others (Momeni et al, 2017; Miri et al, 2018). The generation of constructs should, ideally, mimic the organs or tissues’ architecture and properties and consider the dynamics of material and the cell-material interaction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
