Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine are emerging as future approaches for the treatment of acute and chronic diseases. Numerous clinical conditions exist today and include congenital disorders, trauma, infection, inflammation, and cancer, in which hard and soft tissue damage, organ failure and loss are still not treated effectively. Researchers are constantly developing new biomaterials and tissue-engineered technologies to stimulate tissue regeneration. Various emerging approaches according to organ, tissue, disease and disorder are identified. Irrespective, engineered biomaterials are required to regenerate and ultimately reproduce the original physiological, biological, chemical, and mechanical properties. Biodegradable materials have been used extensively as regenerative therapies. The selection, design, biological and physicochemical properties of these materials are important and must be considered for stimulating tissue growth. In this review, we critique recently developed biodegradable materials for tissue regeneration of some targeted organs e.g., skin, nerves, blood vessels, heart, cornea, trachea, dental/oral structure and bones.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WilsonRS.New absorbable explants using gelatin and synthetic materials. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1983;81:966.
2.
YannasIV.Tissue and organ regeneration in adults. Newton, MA: Springer Science & Business Media; 2015.
3.
Kuchler-BoppSLarreaAPetryLPromoting bioengineered tooth innervation using nanostructured and hybrid scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2017;50:493–501.
4.
KhademhosseiniALangerRBorensteinJMicroscale technologies for tissue engineering and biology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(8):2480–2487.
5.
SantosMIReisRL.Vascularization in bone tissue engineering: physiology, current strategies, major hurdles and future challenges. Macromol Biosci. 2010;10(1):12–27.
6.
HubbellJALangerR.Tissue engineering. Chem Eng News. 1995;73(11):42–54.
GuoBLeiBLiPFunctionalized scaffolds to enhance tissue regeneration. Regen Biomater. 2015;2(1):47–57.
9.
BacelarAHCengizIFSilva-CorreiaJ
‘Smart’ hydrogels in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications. Handbook of Intelligent Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. 2017;(2):327–361. ISBN 9789814745130.
10.
ChenBLiebmanCRabbaniPStem cell tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. In: Kotecha M, Magin RL, Mao JJ, editors. Magnetic resonance imaging in tissue engineering. 2017. doi:10.1002/9781119193272.ch1
11.
GomesMERodriguesMTDominguesRMTissue engineering and regenerative medicine: new trends and directions – A year in review. Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews. 2017;23(3):211–224.
12.
ApicellaAApicellaDSyedJInnovative biomaterials in bone tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. In: Tatullo M, editor. MSCs and innovative biomaterials in dentistry. Stem cell biology and regenerative medicine. Humana Press, Cham; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55645-1_4.
13.
VialSReisRLOliveiraJM.Recent advances using gold nanoparticles as a promising multimodal tool for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci. 2017;21(2):92–112.
14.
BalakrishnanBBanerjeeR.Biopolymer-based hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering. Chem Rev. 2011;111(8):4453–4474.
15.
GauvinRKhademhosseiniA.Microscale technologies and modular approaches for tissue engineering: moving toward the fabrication of complex functional structures. ACS Nano. 2011;5(6):4258–4264.
16.
MaPX.Biomimetic materials for tissue engineering. Adv Drug Del Rev. 2008;60(2):184–198.
17.
Van VlierbergheSDubruelPSchachtE.Biopolymer-based hydrogels as scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: a review. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12(5):1387–1408.
18.
PacelliSBasuSWhitlowJStrategies to develop endogenous stem cell-recruiting bioactive materials for tissue repair and regeneration. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2017;120:50–70.
19.
RavnicDJLeberfingerANKoduruSVTransplantation of bioprinted tissues and organs: technical and clinical challenges and future perspectives. Ann Surg. 2017;266(1):48–58.
20.
WuWChengRdas NevesJAdvances in biomaterials for preventing tissue adhesion. J Controlled Release. 2017;261:318–336.
MisraSKValappilSPRoyIPolyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA)/inorganic phase composites for tissue engineering applications. Biomacromolecules. 2006;7(8):2249–2258.
25.
GuptaADixitASalesKMTissue engineering of small intestine current status. Biomacromolecules. 2006;7(10):2701–2709.
26.
RoselliniEBarbaniNGiustiPMolecularly imprinted nanoparticles with recognition properties towards a laminin H-Tyr-Ile-Gly-Ser-Arg-OH sequence for tissue engineering applications. Biomed Mater. 2010;5(6):065007.
27.
KhanASHussainANSidraLFabrication and in vivo evaluation of hydroxyapatite/carbon nanotube electrospun fibers for biomedical/dental application. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2017;80:387–396.
28.
XiaoWHeJNicholJWSynthesis and characterization of photocrosslinkable gelatin and silk fibroin interpenetrating polymer network hydrogels. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(6):2384–2393.
29.
ParkJHHongJMJuYMA novel tissue-engineered trachea with a mechanical behavior similar to native trachea. Biomaterials. 2015;62(0):106–115.
30.
MurphySVAtalaA.3D bioprinting of tissues and organs [Research]. Nat Biotech. 2014;32(8):773–785.
31.
KorolevaAGillAAOrtegaITwo-photon polymerization-generated and micromolding-replicated 3D scaffolds for peripheral neural tissue engineering applications. Biofabrication. 2012;4(2):025005.
32.
VasievIGreerAIMKhokharAZSelf-folding nano- and micropatterned hydrogel tissue engineering scaffolds by single step photolithographic process. Microelectron Eng. 2013;108(0):76–81.
33.
CunniffeGMGonzalez-FernandezTDalyAThree-Dimensional bioprinting of polycaprolactone reinforced gene activated bioinks for bone tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A. 2017;23:891–900.
34.
MurphyCKolanKLiW3D bioprinting of stem cells and polymer/bioactive glass composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Int J Bioprinting. 2017;3(1):1–11.
35.
CostaRMRaufSHauserCA.Towards biologically relevant synthetic designer matrices in 3D bioprinting for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Curr Opin Biomed Eng. 2017;2:90–98.
36.
NguyenDHäggDAForsmanACartilage tissue engineering by the 3D bioprinting of iPS cells in a nanocellulose/alginate bioink. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):658.
37.
NairLSLaurencinCT.Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. Prog Polym Sci. 2007;32(8):762–798.
KimB-SBaezCEAtalaA.Biomaterials for tissue engineering. World J Urol. 2000;18(1):2–9.
40.
BergsmaJERozemaFRBosRRMBiocompatibility and degradation mechanisms of predegraded and non-predegraded poly(lactide) implants: an animal study. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1995;6(12):715–724.
41.
VertMHellwichK-HHessMTerminology for biorelated polymers and applications (IUPAC recommendations 2012). Pure Appl Chem. 2012;84(2):377–410.
42.
JonesRGWilksESMetanomskiWVCompendium of polymer terminology and nomenclature: IUPAC recommendations. Royal Society of Chemistry Cambridge; 2008.
43.
AmassWAmassATigheB.A review of biodegradable polymers: uses, current developments in the synthesis and characterization of biodegradable polyesters, blends of biodegradable polymers and recent advances in biodegradation studies. Polym Int. 1998;47(2):89–144.
44.
McNaughtAD.Compendium of chemical terminology. Vol. 1669. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1997.
45.
NavarroMMichiardiACastañoOBiomaterials in orthopaedics. J R Soc Interface. 2008;5(27):1137–1158.
46.
KhanAWongFMcKayIStructural, mechanical, and biocompatibility analyses of a novel dental restorative nanocomposite. J Appl Polym Sci. 2013;127(1):439–447.
47.
KhanAFAfzalAChaudharyAA(Hydroxypropyl) methylcellulose mediated synthesis of highly porous composite scaffolds for trabecular bone repair applications. Sci Adv Mater. 2015;7(6):1177–1186.
48.
KhanASAzizMSPaulDSynthesis and in-vitro analysis of degradative resistance of a novel bioactive composite. Journal of Bionanoscience. 2008;2(2):75–88.
49.
SabirMXuXLiL.A review on biodegradable polymeric materials for bone tissue engineering applications. J Mat Sci. 2009;44(21):5713–5724.
50.
GomesMEReisR.Biodegradable polymers and composites in biomedical applications: from catgut to tissue engineering. Part 2 systems for temporary replacement and advanced tissue regeneration. Int Mater Rev. 2004;49(5):274–285.
51.
GomesMEReisR.Biodegradable polymers and composites in biomedical applications: from catgut to tissue engineering. Part 1 available systems and their properties. Int Mater Rev. 2004;49(5):261–273.
52.
GuoBMaPX.Synthetic biodegradable functional polymers for tissue engineering: a brief review. Science China Chemistry. 2014;57(4):490–500.
53.
RichJKorhonenHHakalaRPorous biodegradable scaffold: predetermined porosity by dissolution of poly(ester-anhydride) fibers from polyester matrix. Macromol Biosci. 2009;9(7):654–660.
54.
RhimJ-WMohantyAKSinghSPEffect of the processing methods on the performance of polylactide films: thermocompression versus solvent casting. J Appl Polym Sci. 2006;101(6):3736–3742.
55.
GentilePChionoVCarmagnolaIAn overview of poly (lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA)-based biomaterials for bone tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15(3):3640–3659.
56.
MaPX.Scaffolds for tissue fabrication. Mater Today. 2004;7(5):30–40.
57.
VacantiJPLangerR.Tissue engineering: the design and fabrication of living replacement devices for surgical reconstruction and transplantation. The Lancet. 1999;354:S32–S34.
58.
ChangLLiuJZhangJpH-sensitive nanoparticles prepared from amphiphilic and biodegradable methoxy poly (ethylene glycol)-block-(polycaprolactone-graft-poly (methacrylic acid)) for oral drug delivery. Polym Chem. 2013;4(5):1430–1438.
59.
E McNeilSR GriffithsHPerrieY.Polycaprolactone fibres as a potential delivery system for collagen to support bone regeneration. Curr Drug Del. 2011;8(4):448–455.
LeeHSParkSHLeeJHAntimicrobial and biodegradable PLGA medical sutures with natural grapefruit seed extracts. Mater Lett. 2013;95(0):40–43.
62.
ShinHJoSMikosAG.Biomimetic materials for tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2003;24(24):4353–4364.
63.
WenXTrescoPA.Fabrication and characterization of permeable degradable poly(DL-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) hollow fiber phase inversion membranes for use as nerve tract guidance channels. Biomaterials. 2006;27(20):3800–3809.
64.
BhardwajNSowWTDeviDSilk fibroin-keratin based 3D scaffolds as a dermal substitute for skin tissue engineering. Integr Biol. 2015;7(1):53–63.
65.
NguyenX-TVan ToiVNguyenT-H.Development of a new injectable PVA–Ag NPs/ chitosan hydrogel for wound dressing application. 5th international conference on biomedical engineering in Vietnam. In: ToiVVLien PhuongTH, editors. IFMBE proceedings. Vol. 46. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 321–324.
66.
KanitkarASmoakMChenCSynthesis of novel polyesters for potential applications in skin tissue engineering. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2016;91:733–741.
67.
BendixD.Chemical synthesis of polylactide and its copolymers for medical applications. Polym Degrad Stab. 1998;59(1):129–135.
68.
RehmanIU.Biodegradable polyurethanes: biodegradable low adherence films for the prevention of adhesions after surgery. J Biomater Appl. 1996;11(2):182–257.
69.
SitharamanBShiXTranLAInjectable in situ cross-linkable nanocomposites of biodegradable polymers and carbon nanostructures for bone tissue engineering. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2007;18(6):655–671.
70.
DhandayuthapaniBYoshidaYMaekawaTPolymeric scaffolds in tissue engineering application: a review. Int J Polym Sci. 2011;2011:1–19.
71.
SwethaMSahithiKMoorthiABiocomposites containing natural polymers and hydroxyapatite for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2010;47(1):1–4.
72.
RogalskiJKrasowskaBGlowiakGPurification and some properties of extracellular chitinases produced by Trichoderma viride F-19. Acta Microbiol Pol. 1997;46(4):363–375.
73.
TronsmoAHarmanGE.Detection and quantification of N-Acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase, chitobiosidase, and endochitinase in solutions and on gels. Anal Biochem. 1993;208(1):74–79.
74.
FelsePPandaT.Production of microbial chitinases – a revisit. Bioprocess Eng. 2000;23(2):127–134.
75.
BolarJPNorelliJLHarmanGESynergistic activity of endochitinase and exochitinase from Trichoderma atroviride (T. harzianum) against the pathogenic fungus (Venturia inaequalis) in transgenic apple plants. Transgenic Res. 2001;10(6):533–543.
76.
van der RestMDubletBChampliaudMF.Fibril-associated collagens. Biomaterials. 1990;11:28–31.
77.
PachenceJM.Collagen-based devices for soft tissue repair. J Biomed Mater Res. 1996;33(1):35–40.
78.
AnselmeKBacquesCCharriereGTissue reaction to subcutaneous implantation of a collagen sponge. A histological, ultrastructural, and immunological study. J Biomed Mater Res. 1990;24(6):689–703.
79.
ZhangZOrtizOGoyalRChapter 23 – biodegradable polymers. Principles of tissue engineering (fourth edition). In: LanzaRLangerRVacantiJ, editors. Boston (MA): Academic Press; 2014. p. 441–473.
80.
CharvolinJSadocJ-F.About collagen, a tribute to Yves Bouligand. Interface Focus. 2012;2(5):567–574.
81.
KhanASAamerSChaudhryAASynthesis and characterizations of a fluoride-releasing dental restorative material. Mat Sci Eng C. 2013;33(6):3458–3464.
82.
KhanASAhmedZEdirisingheMJPreparation and characterization of a novel bioactive restorative composite based on covalently coupled polyurethane–nanohydroxyapatite fibres. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(5):1275–1287.
83.
TalalAMcKayITannerKEffects of hydroxyapatite and PDGF concentrations on osteoblast growth in a nanohydroxyapatite-polylactic acid composite for guided tissue regeneration. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2013;24(9):2211–2221.
84.
CaiQYangJBeiJA novel porous cells scaffold made of polylactide–dextran blend by combining phase-separation and particle-leaching techniques. Biomaterials. 2002;23(23):4483–4492.
85.
MaquetVBoccacciniARPravataLPorous poly(α-hydroxyacid)/Bioglass® composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. I: preparation and in vitro characterisation. Biomaterials. 2004;25(18):4185–4194.
86.
WeiGMaPX.Structure and properties of nano-hydroxyapatite/polymer composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2004;25(19):4749–4757.
87.
KanitakisJ.Anatomy, histology and immunohistochemistry of normal human skin. Eur J Dermatol. 2002;12(4):390–399.
88.
MansbridgeJ.Chapter 81 – tissue-engineered skin products. Principles of tissue engineering (fourth edition). In: LanzaRLangerRVacantiJ, editors. Boston (MA): Academic Press; 2014. p. 1697–1715.
89.
ShahzadiLYarMJamalATriethyl orthoformate covalently cross-linked chitosan-(poly vinyl) alcohol based biodegradable scaffolds with heparin-binding ability for promoting neovascularisation. J Biomater Appl. 2016;31(4):582–593.
90.
MacNeilS.Progress and opportunities for tissue-engineered skin. Nature. 2007;445(7130):874–880.
91.
VigKChaudhariATripathiSAdvances in skin regeneration using tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18(4):789.
92.
JeonEYChoiB-HJungDNatural healing-inspired collagen-targeting surgical protein glue for accelerated scarless skin regeneration. Biomaterials. 2017;134:154–165.
93.
BhardwajNChouhanDMandalB.Tissue engineered skin and wound healing: current strategies and future directions. Curr Pharm Des. 2017;23(24):3455–3482.
94.
PapugaAYLukashLL.Different types of biotechnological wound coverages created with the application of alive human cells. Biopolym Cell. 2015;31(2):83–96.
95.
SnyderDavid L.SullivanNancySchoellesKaren M.Skin substitutes for treating chronic wounds: agency or Healthcare Research and Quality MD USA; 2012.
96.
MelodieB.The use of best practice in the treatment of a complex diabetic foot ulcer: a case report. Healthcare. 2016;4(1):18.
97.
KamelRAOngJFErikssonETissue engineering of skin. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217(3):533–555.
98.
SuppDMBoyceST.Engineered skin substitutes: practices and potentials. Clin Dermatol. 2005;23(4):403–412.
99.
BalasubramaniMKumarTRBabuM.Skin substitutes: a review. Burns. 2001;27(5):534–544.
ShakespearePG.The role of skin substitutes in the treatment of burn injuries. Clin Dermatol. 2005;23(4):413–418.
102.
ShakespeareP.Burn wound healing and skin substitutes. Burns. 2001;27(5):517–522.
103.
MetcalfeADFergusonMWJ.Tissue engineering of replacement skin: the crossroads of biomaterials, wound healing, embryonic development, stem cells and regeneration. J R Soc Interface. 2007;4(14):413–437.
104.
GroeberFHoleiterMHampelMSkin tissue engineering – in vivo and in vitro applications. Adv Drug Del Rev. 2011;63(4–5):352–366.
105.
RuCWangFPangMSuspended, shrinkage-free, electrospun PLGA nanofibrous scaffold for skin tissue engineering. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2015;7(20):10872–10877.
106.
RamosDMSubramanianAAravamudhanANanotissue engineering of skin cells. In Baharvand H, Aghdami N, editors. Stem-cell nanoengineering; 2015. doi:10.1002/9781118540640.ch18
107.
HussFRMNymanEGustafsonC-JCharacterization of a new degradable polymer scaffold for regeneration of the dermis: In vitro and in vivo human studies. Organogenesis. 2008;4(3):195–200.
108.
ChuaAWCKhooYCTanBKSkin tissue engineering advances in severe burns: review and therapeutic applications. Burns Trauma. 2016;4(1):3.
109.
GreenwoodJELiADearmanBLEvaluation of NovoSorb™ novel biodegradable polymer for the generation of a dermal matrix Part 1: in-vitro. Wound Practice & Research: Journal of the Australian Wound Management Association. 2010;18(1):14–22.
110.
AkitaSAkinoKImaizumiTA polyurethane dressing is beneficial for split-thickness skin-graft donor wound healing. Burns. 2006;32(4):447–451.
111.
ChoYSLeeJWLeeJSHyaluronic acid and silver sulfadiazine-impregnated polyurethane foams for wound dressing application. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2002;13(9):861–865.
112.
MartineauLShekPN.Evaluation of a bi-layer wound dressing for burn care: I. Cooling and wound healing properties. Burns. 2006;32(1):70–76.
113.
PhanTTLimIJTanEKEvaluation of cell culture on the polyurethane-based membrane (TegadermTM): implication for tissue engineering of skin. Cell Tissue Banking. 2005;6(2):91–97.
114.
GreenwoodJELiADearmanBLEvaluation of NovoSorb™ novel biodegradable polymer for the generation of a dermal matrix Part 2: in-vivo studies. Wound Practice & Research: Journal of the Australian Wound Management Association. 2010;18(1):24–34.
LagusHSarlomo-RikalaMBohlingTProspective study on burns treated with Integra(R), a cellulose sponge and split thickness skin graft: comparative clinical and histological study – randomized controlled trial. Burns. 2013;39(8):1577–1587.
117.
BergerATanzellaUMachensHGDer Einsatz von Integra bei primären Verbrennungswunden und instabilen sekundären Narben. Der Chirurg. 2000;71(5):558–563.
118.
MartsonMViljantoJLaippalaPConnective tissue formation in subcutaneous cellulose sponge implants in the rat. The effect of the size and cellulose content of the implant. Eur Surg Res. 1998;30(6):419–425.
119.
ViljantoJ.Cellstic: a device for wound healing studies in man. Description of the method. J Surg Res. 1976;20(2):115–119.
120.
MärtsonMViljantoJHurmeTIs cellulose sponge degradable or stable as implantation material? An in vivo subcutaneous study in the rat. Biomaterials. 1999;20(21):1989–1995.
121.
SwopeVBSuppAPSchwembergerSIncreased expression of integrins and decreased apoptosis correlate with increased melanocyte retention in cultured skin substitutes. Pigm Cell Res. 2006;19(5):424–433.
122.
HedleySJLaytonCHeatonMFibroblasts play a regulatory role in the control of pigmentation in reconstructed human skin from skin types I and II. Pigm Cell Res. 2002;15(1):49–56.
123.
YouH-JHanS-K.Cell therapy for wound healing. J Korean Med Sci. 2014;29(3):311–319.
124.
MathioudakisNHicksCWCannerJKThe society for vascular surgery wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) classification system predicts wound healing but not major amputation in patients with diabetic foot ulcers treated in a multidisciplinary setting. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65(6):1698–1705.
125.
JamalAShahzadiLAhtzazSIdentification of anti-cancer potential of doxazocin: loading into chitosan based biodegradable hydrogels for on-site delivery to treat cervical cancer. Mat Sci Eng C. 2018;82:102–109.
126.
KimY-JJeongJ-H.Clinical application of adipose stem cells in plastic surgery. J Korean Med Sci. 2014;29(4):462–467.
127.
WangSWanACAXuXA new nerve guide conduit material composed of a biodegradable poly(phosphoester). Biomaterials. 2001;22(10):1157–1169.
128.
WanACAMaoH-QWangSFabrication of poly(phosphoester) nerve guides by immersion precipitation and the control of porosity. Biomaterials. 2001;22(10):1147–1156.
129.
BiniTBGaoSXuXPeripheral nerve regeneration by microbraided poly(L-lactide-co-glycolide) biodegradable polymer fibers. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2004;68A(2):286–295.
130.
BiniTBGaoSWangSDevelopment of fibrous biodegradable polymer conduits for guided nerve regeneration. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16(4):367–375.
131.
LlorensEArmelinEdel Mar Pérez-MadrigaleMNanomembranes and nanofibers from biodegradable conducting polymers. Polymers. 2013;5(3):1115–1157.
132.
LiuYHuJZhuangXPreparation and characterization of biodegradable and electroactive polymer blend materials based on mPEG/Tetraaniline and PLLA. Macromol Biosci. 2011;11(6):806–813.
133.
ZhangQYanYLiSThe synthesis and characterization of a novel biodegradable and electroactive polyphosphazene for nerve regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C. 2010;30(1):160–166.
134.
GuoBSunYFinne-WistrandAElectroactive porous tubular scaffolds with degradability and non-cytotoxicity for neural tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(1):144–153.
BettingerCJBruggemanJPMisraABiocompatibility of biodegradable semiconducting melanin films for nerve tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2009;30(17):3050–3057.
137.
KrarupCArchibaldSJMadisonRD.Factors that influence peripheral nerve regeneration: an electrophysiological study of the monkey median nerve. Ann Neurol. 2002;5(1):69–81.
138.
McLaughlinCRAcostaMCLunaCRegeneration of functional nerves within full thickness collagen–phosphorylcholine corneal substitute implants in Guinea pigs. Biomaterials. 2010;31(10):2770–2778.
139.
YamaguchiIItohSSuzukiMThe chitosan prepared from crab tendon I: the characterization and the mechanical properties. Biomaterials. 2003;24(12):2031–2036.
140.
HashimotoTSuzukiYSuzukiKReview peripheral nerve regeneration using non-tubular alginate gel crosslinked with covalent bonds. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16(6):503–509.
141.
YoshiiSOkaMlkedaNBridging a peripheral nerve defect using collagen filaments. J Hand Surg. 2001; 26(1):52–59.
142.
SufanWSuzukiYTaniharaMSciatic nerve regeneration through alginate with tubulation or nontubulation repair in cat. J Neurotrauma. 2001;18(3):329–338.
143.
VazCMvan TuijlSBoutenCVCDesign of scaffolds for blood vessel tissue engineering using a multi-layering electrospinning technique. Acta Biomater. 2005;1(5):575–582.
144.
LiMMondrinosMJGandhiMRElectrospun protein fibers as matrices for tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2005;26(30):5999–6008.
145.
WeinbergCBBellE.A blood vessel model constructed from collagen and cultured vascular cells. Science. 1986;231(4736):397–400.
146.
NiklasonLEGaoJAbbottWMFunctional arteries grown in vitro. Science. 1999;284(5413):489–493.
147.
WatanabeMShin’okaTTohyamaSTissue-engineered vascular autograft: inferior vena cava replacement in a dog model. Tissue Eng. 2001;7(4):429–439.
148.
Shin’okaTImaiYIkadaY.Transplantation of a tissue-engineered pulmonary artery. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(7):532–533.
149.
HabermehlJSkopinskaJBoccafoschiFPreparation of ready-to-use, stockable and reconstituted collagen. Macromol Biosci. 2005;5(9):821–828.
150.
CummingsCLGawlittaDNeremRMProperties of engineered vascular constructs made from collagen, fibrin, and collagen–fibrin mixtures. Biomaterials. 2004;25(17):3699–3706.
151.
SwartzDDRussellJAAndreadisST.Engineering of fibrin-based functional and implantable small-diameter blood vessels. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2005;288(3):H1451–H1460.
152.
LeeSJYooJJLimGJIn vitro evaluation of electrospun nanofiber scaffolds for vascular graft application. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2007;83A(4):999–1008.
153.
StankusJJSolettiLFujimotoKFabrication of cell microintegrated blood vessel constructs through electrohydrodynamic atomization. Biomaterials. 2007;28(17):2738–2746.
154.
BarnesCPSellSABolandEDNanofiber technology: designing the next generation of tissue engineering scaffolds. Adv Drug Del Rev. 2007;59(14):1413–1433.
155.
RaviSChaikofEL.Biomaterials for vascular tissue engineering. Regen Med. 2009;5(1):107–120.
156.
Calogero FioricaSRPalumboFSA fibrillar biodegradable scaffold for blood vessels tissue engineering. CET Chem Eng Trans. 2012;27:403–408.
157.
NotteletBPektokEMandracchiaDFactorial design optimization and in vivo feasibility of poly(ε-caprolactone)-micro- and nanofiber-based small diameter vascular grafts. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;89A(4):865–875.
158.
KawaguchiNHattaKNakanishiT.3D-culture system for heart regeneration and cardiac medicine. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:1–6.
159.
ForouzanfarMHMoranAEFlaxmanADAssessing the global burden of ischemic heart disease. Glob Heart. 2014;7(4):331–342.
160.
BergmannOBhardwajRDBernardSEvidence for cardiomyocyte renewal in humans. Science. 2009;324(5923):98–102.
161.
RuvinovEDvirTLeorJMyocardial repair: from salvage to tissue reconstruction. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2008;6(5):669–686.
162.
ShahabipourFBanachMJohnstonTPNovel approaches toward the generation of bioscaffolds as a potential therapy in cardiovascular tissue engineering. Int J Cardiol. 2017;228:319–326.
163.
PuppiDPirosaALupiGDesign and fabrication of novel polymeric biodegradable stents for small caliber blood vessels by computer-aided wet-spinning. Biomed Mater. 2017;12(3):035011.
164.
SilvestriABoffitoMSartoriSBiomimetic materials and scaffolds for myocardial tissue regeneration. Macromol Biosci. 2013;13(8):984–1019.
165.
ShapiraAFeinerRDvirT.Composite biomaterial scaffolds for cardiac tissue engineering. Int Mater Rev. 2016;61(1):1–19.
166.
YeQZündGBenediktPFibrin gel as a three dimensional matrix in cardiovascular tissue engineering. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000;17(5):587–591.
167.
MolAvan LieshoutMIDam-de VeenCGFibrin as a cell carrier in cardiovascular tissue engineering applications. Biomaterials. 2005;26(16):3113–3121.
168.
FlanaganTCCornelissenCKochSThe in vitro development of autologous fibrin-based tissue-engineered heart valves through optimised dynamic conditioning. Biomaterials. 2007;28(23):3388–3397.
169.
ChristmanKLFokHHSieversREFibrin glue alone and skeletal myoblasts in a fibrin scaffold preserve cardiac function after myocardial infarction. Tissue Eng. 2004;10(3–4):403–409.
170.
ChristmanKLVardanianAJFangQInjectable fibrin scaffold improves cell transplant survival, reduces infarct expansion, and induces neovasculature formation in ischemic myocardium. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(3):654–660.
171.
DengCZhangPVulesevicBA collagen–chitosan hydrogel for endothelial differentiation and angiogenesis. Tissue Eng, Part A. 2010;16(10):3099–3109.
172.
PatraCTalukdarSNovoyatlevaTSilk protein fibroin from Antheraea mylitta for cardiac tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2012;33(9):2673–2680.
173.
Gnanaprakasam ThankamFMuthuJSankarVGrowth and survival of cells in biosynthetic poly vinyl alcohol–alginate IPN hydrogels for cardiac applications. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2013;107:137–145.
174.
RoselliniECristalliniCBarbaniNPreparation and characterization of alginate/gelatin blend films for cardiac tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;91(2):447–453.
175.
KimD-HSmithJTChilkotiAThe effect of covalently immobilized rhIL-1ra-ELP fusion protein on the inflammatory profile of LPS-stimulated human monocytes. Biomaterials. 2007;28(23):3369–3377.
176.
BalguidARubbensMPMolAThe role of collagen cross-links in biomechanical behavior of human aortic heart valve leaflets-relevance for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. 2007;13(7):1501–1511.
177.
FlanaganTCWilkinsBBlackAA collagen-glycosaminoglycan co-culture model for heart valve tissue engineering applications. Biomaterials. 2006;27(10):2233–2246.
LandaNMillerLFeinbergMSEffect of injectable alginate implant on cardiac remodeling and function after recent and old infarcts in rat. Circulation. 2008;117(11):1388–1396.
180.
HaoXSilvaEAMånsson-BrobergAAngiogenic effects of sequential release of VEGF-A165 and PDGF-BB with alginate hydrogels after myocardial infarction. Cardiovasc Res. 2007;75(1):178–185.
181.
LeeJTanCYLeeS-KControlled delivery of heat shock protein using an injectable microsphere/hydrogel combination system for the treatment of myocardial infarction. J Controlled Release. 2009;137(3):196–202.
182.
RuvinovELeorJCohenS.The promotion of myocardial repair by the sequential delivery of IGF-1 and HGF from an injectable alginate biomaterial in a model of acute myocardial infarction. Biomaterials. 2011;32(2):565–578.
183.
IshiiOShinMSuedaTIn vitro tissue engineering of a cardiac graft using a degradable scaffold with an extracellular matrix–like topography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;130(5):1358–1363.
184.
TianLPrabhakaranMPDingXEmulsion electrospun vascular endothelial growth factor encapsulated poly (l-lactic acid-co-ε-caprolactone) nanofibers for sustained release in cardiac tissue engineering. J Mater Sci. 2012;47(7):3272–3281.
185.
OzawaTMickleDAWeiselRDOptimal biomaterial for creation of autologous cardiac grafts. Circulation. 2002;106(12 ):176–182.
186.
KharazihaMNikkhahMShinS-RPGS: gelatin nanofibrous scaffolds with tunable mechanical and structural properties for engineering cardiac tissues. Biomaterials. 2013;34(27):6355–6366.
187.
RavichandranRVenugopalJRSundarrajanSExpression of cardiac proteins in neonatal cardiomyocytes on PGS/fibrinogen core/shell substrate for cardiac tissue engineering. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167(4):1461–1468.
KaiDPrabhakaranMPJinGGuided orientation of cardiomyocytes on electrospun aligned nanofibers for cardiac tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2011;98(2):379–386.
HindererSSeifertJVottelerMEngineering of a bio-functionalized hybrid off-the-shelf heart valve. Biomaterials. 2014;35(7):2130–2139.
192.
SantSHwangCMLeeSHHybrid PGS–PCL microfibrous scaffolds with improved mechanical and biological properties. J Tissue Eng Reg Med. 2011;5(4):283–291.
193.
RavichandranRVenugopalJRSundarrajanSMinimally invasive injectable short nanofibers of poly (glycerol sebacate) for cardiac tissue engineering. Nanotechnology. 2012;23(38):385102.
194.
PokSMyersJDMadihallySVA multilayered scaffold of a chitosan and gelatin hydrogel supported by a PCL core for cardiac tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(3):5630–5642.
195.
KaiDPrabhakaranMPJinGBiocompatibility evaluation of electrically conductive nanofibrous scaffolds for cardiac tissue engineering. J Mater Chem B. 2013;1(17):2305–2314.
196.
TsengHPuperiDSKimEJAnisotropic poly (ethylene glycol)/polycaprolactone (PEG/PCL) hydrogel-fiber composites for heart valve tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A. 2014;20:2634–2645.
197.
FongPShin’okaTLopez-SolerRIThe use of polymer based scaffolds in tissue-engineered heart valves. Prog Pediatr Cardiol. 2006;21(2):193–199.
198.
MartinDPWilliamsSF.Medical applications of poly-4-hydroxybutyrate: a strong flexible absorbable biomaterial. Biochem Eng J. 2003;16(2):97–105.
199.
Vunjak-NovakovicGLuiKOTandonNBioengineering heart muscle: a paradigm for regenerative medicine. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2011;13:245–267.
200.
HirtMNHansenAEschenhagenT.Cardiac tissue engineering: state of the art. Circ Res. 2014;114(2):354–367.
201.
ElamparithiAPunnooseAMKuruvillaS.Electrospun type 1 collagen matrices preserving native ultrastructure using benign binary solvent for cardiac tissue engineering. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol. 2016;44:1318–1325.
202.
RuvinovECohenS.Alginate biomaterial for the treatment of myocardial infarction: progress, translational strategies, and clinical outlook: from ocean algae to patient bedside. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;96:54–76.
203.
AvadhanamVSSmithHELiuC.Keratoprostheses for corneal blindness: a review of contemporary devices. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:697–720.
204.
FengYBorrelliMReichlSReview of alternative carrier materials for ocular surface reconstruction. Curr Eye Res. 2014;39(6):541–552.
205.
GhezziCERnjak-KovacinaJKaplanDL.Corneal tissue engineering: recent advances and future perspectives. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2015;21:278–289.
206.
LiFCarlssonDLohmannCCellular and nerve regeneration within a biosynthetic extracellular matrix for corneal transplantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(26):15346–15351.
207.
ShahABrugnanoJSunSThe development of a tissue-engineered cornea: biomaterials and culture methods. Pediatr Res. 2008;63(5):535–544.
208.
GaoXLiuWHanBPreparation and properties of a chitosan-based carrier of corneal endothelial cells. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2008;19(12):3611–3619.
209.
MaddenPWLaiJNGeorgeKAHuman corneal endothelial cell growth on a silk fibroin membrane. Biomaterials. 2011;32(17):4076–4084.
VranaNEBuillesNJustinVDevelopment of a reconstructed cornea from collagen–chondroitin sulfate foams and human cell cultures. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci. 2008;49(12):5325–5331.
212.
LiFGriffithMLiZRecruitment of multiple cell lines by collagen-synthetic copolymer matrices in corneal regeneration. Biomaterials. 2005;26(16):3093–3104.
213.
OrwinEJHubelA.In vitro culture characteristics of corneal epithelial, endothelial, and keratocyte cells in a native collagen matrix. Tissue Eng. 2000;6(4):307–319.
214.
LiangYLiuWHanBAn in situ formed biodegradable hydrogel for reconstruction of the corneal endothelium. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2011;82(1):1–7.
215.
LiuHXiPXieGSimultaneous reduction and surface functionalization of graphene oxide for hydroxyapatite mineralization. J Phy Chem C. 2012;116(5):3334–3341.
216.
OzcelikBBrownKDBlencoweAUltrathin chitosan–poly (ethylene glycol) hydrogel films for corneal tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(5):6594–6605.
217.
MimuraTAmanoSYokooSTissue engineering of corneal stroma with rabbit fibroblast precursors and gelatin hydrogels. Mol Vis. 2008;14:1819.
218.
LaiJ-YMaDH-KLaiM-HCharacterization of cross-linked porous gelatin carriers and their interaction with corneal endothelium: biopolymer concentration effect. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(1):e54058.
219.
LaiJ-YLiY-TChoC-HNanoscale modification of porous gelatin scaffolds with chondroitin sulfate for corneal stromal tissue engineering. Int J Nanomed. 2012;7:1101–1114.
220.
LaiJ-YLiY-T.Functional assessment of cross-linked porous gelatin hydrogels for bioengineered cell sheet carriers. Biomacromolecules. 2010;11(5):1387–1397.
221.
LawrenceBDMarchantJKPindrusMASilk film biomaterials for cornea tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2009;30(7):1299–1308.
222.
BrayLJGeorgeKAHutmacherDWA dual-layer silk fibroin scaffold for reconstructing the human corneal limbus. Biomaterials. 2012;33(13):3529–3538.
223.
HigaKTakeshimaNMoroFPorous silk fibroin film as a transparent carrier for cultivated corneal epithelial sheets. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2011;22(17):2261–2276.
224.
KlenklerBGriffithMBecerrilCEGF-grafted PDMS surfaces in artificial cornea applications. Biomaterials. 2005;26(35):7286–7296.
225.
OrtegaÍRyanAJDeshpandePCombined microfabrication and electrospinning to produce 3-D architectures for corneal repair. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(3):5511–5520.
226.
DeshpandePMcKeanRBlackwoodKAUsing poly (lactide-co-glycolide) electrospun scaffolds to deliver cultured epithelial cells to the cornea. Regen Med. 2010;5(3):395–401.
227.
SefatFMcKeanRDeshpandePProduction, sterilisation and storage of biodegradable electrospun PLGA membranes for delivery of Limbal Stem cells to the cornea. Procedia Eng. 2013;59:101–116.
228.
OrtegaIMcKeanRRyanAJCharacterisation and evaluation of the impact of microfabricated pockets on the performance of limbal epithelial stem cells in biodegradable PLGA membranes for corneal regeneration. Biomater Sci. 2014;2:723–734.
229.
DeshpandePRamachandranCSangwanVSCultivation of limbal epithelial cells on electrospun poly (lactide-co-glycolide) scaffolds for delivery to the cornea. Corneal Regenerative Medicine,Methods and Protocols, Methods in Molecular Biology,. In: Wright B, Connon, Che J editors. Vol. 1014. p. 179–185 2013 New York: Springer.
230.
DeshpandePRamachandranCSefatFSimplifying corneal surface regeneration using a biodegradable synthetic membrane and limbal tissue explants. Biomaterials. 2013;34(21):5088–5106.
231.
ChirilaTV.An overview of the development of artificial corneas with porous skirts and the use of PHEMA for such an application. Biomaterials. 2001;22(24):3311–3317.
232.
OzcelikBBrownKDBlencoweABiodegradable and biocompatible poly (Ethylene Glycol)-based hydrogel films for the regeneration of corneal endothelium. Adv Healthc Mater. 2014;3:1496–1507.
233.
MyungDFarooquiNZhengLLBioactive interpenetrating polymer network hydrogels that support corneal epithelial wound healing. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;90(1):70–81.
234.
ParkSNamSHKohWG.Preparation of collagen-immobilized poly (ethylene glycol)/poly (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) interpenetrating network hydrogels for potential application of artificial cornea. J Appl Polym Sci. 2012;123(2):637–645.
235.
YoungT-HWangIHuF-RFabrication of a bioengineered corneal endothelial cell sheet using chitosan/polycaprolactone blend membranes. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2014;116:403–410.
236.
FagerholmPLagaliNSMerrettKA biosynthetic alternative to human donor tissue for inducing corneal regeneration: 24-month follow-up of a phase 1 clinical study. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2(46):46ra61.
237.
JaradeEFSlimECherfanCMathematical analysis of corneal remodelling after intracorneal ring surgery in keratoconus. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;10(3):348.
238.
Mirazul IslamMCeplaVHeCFunctional fabrication of recombinant human collagen-phosphorylcholine hydrogels for regenerative medicine applications. Acta Biomater. 2015;12:70–80.
239.
TsaiILHsuCCHungKHApplications of biomaterials in corneal wound healing. J Chin Med Assoc. 2015;78(4):212–217.
240.
LeeMCKimDKLeeOJFabrication of silk fibroin film using centrifugal casting technique for corneal tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2016;104B:508–514.
241.
PihlstromBLMichalowiczBSJohnsonNW.Periodontal diseases. The Lancet. 2005;366(9499):1809–1820.
242.
VillarCCCochranDL.Regeneration of periodontal tissues: guided tissue regeneration. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54(1):73–92.
243.
MinabeM.A critical review of the biologic rationale for guided tissue regeneration. J Periodontol. 1991;62(3):171–179.
244.
Karfeld-SulzerLSGhayorCSiegenthalerBComparative study of NMP-preloaded and dip-loaded membranes for guided bone regeneration of rabbit cranial defects. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2017;11(2):425–433.
245.
BottinoMCPankajakshanDNörJE.Advanced scaffolds for dental pulp and periodontal regeneration. Dent Clin North Am. 2017;61(4):689–711.
246.
BottinoMCThomasVJanowskiGM.A novel spatially designed and functionally graded electrospun membrane for periodontal regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(1):216–224.
247.
KellomäkiMNiiranenHPuumanenKBioabsorbable scaffolds for guided bone regeneration and generation. Biomaterials. 2000;21(24):2495–2505.
248.
ParkJKYeomJOhEJGuided bone regeneration by poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) grafted hyaluronic acid bi-layer films for periodontal barrier applications. Acta Biomater. 2009;5(9):3394–3403.
249.
GentilePChionoVTonda-TuroCPolymeric membranes for guided bone regeneration. Biotechnol J. 2011;6(10):1187–1197.
250.
BehringJJunkerRWalboomersXFToward guided tissue and bone regeneration: morphology, attachment, proliferation, and migration of cells cultured on collagen barrier membranes. A Systematic Review Odontology. 2008;96(1):1–11.
251.
YamadaMKojimaNAttWImprovement in the osteoblastic cellular response to a commercial collagen membrane and demineralized freeze-dried bone by an amino acid derivative: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(2):165–172.
252.
SheikhZKhanASRoohpourNProtein adsorption capability on polyurethane and modified-polyurethane membrane for periodontal guided tissue regeneration applications. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;68:267–275.
253.
YarMFarooqAShahzadiLNovel meloxicam releasing electrospun polymer/ceramic reinforced biodegradable membranes for periodontal regeneration applications. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2016;64:148–156.
254.
FarooqAYarMKhanASSynthesis of piroxicam loaded novel electrospun biodegradable nanocomposite scaffolds for periodontal regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2015;56:104–113.
255.
TrajanoVCCostaKJLanzaCROsteogenic activity of cyclodextrin-encapsulated doxycycline in a calcium phosphate PCL and PLGA composite. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2016;64:370–375.
256.
KasajAReichertCGotzHIn vitro evaluation of various bioabsorbable and nonresorbable barrier membranes for guided tissue regeneration. Head Face Med. 2008;4(1):22–29.
257.
ChenSHaoYCuiWBiodegradable electrospun PLLA/chitosan membrane as guided tissue regeneration membrane for treating periodontitis. J Mater Sci. 2013;48(19):6567–6577.
258.
KimYHParkJHLeeMPolyethylenimine with acid-labile linkages as a biodegradable gene carrier. J Controlled Release. 2005;103(1):209–219.
259.
CuiWLiXChenJIn situ growth kinetics of hydroxyapatite on electrospun poly(dl-lactide) fibers with gelatin grafted. Cryst Growth Des. 2008;8(12):4576–4582.
260.
SculeanANikolidakisDSchwarzF.Regeneration of periodontal tissues: combinations of barrier membranes and grafting materials – biological foundation and preclinical evidence: A systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:106–116.
261.
MilellaERamiresPABresciaEPhysicochemical, mechanical, and biological properties of commercial membranes for GTR. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;58(4):427–435.
262.
BottinoMCThomasVSchmidtGRecent advances in the development of GTR/GBR membranes for periodontal regeneration – A materials perspective. Dent Mater. 2012;28(7):703–721.
263.
LiuXMaLMaoZChitosan-based biomaterials for tissue repair and regeneration. Chitosan for biomaterials II. In: JayakumarRPrabaharanMMuzzarelliRAA, editors. Advances in polymer science. Vol. 244. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 81–127.
264.
KuYShimIKLeeJYChitosan/poly (L-lactic acid) multilayered membrane for guided tissue regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;90(3):766–772.
265.
LeeE-JShinD-SKimH-EMembrane of hybrid chitosan–silica xerogel for guided bone regeneration. Biomaterials. 2009;30(5):743–750.
266.
ShinS-YParkH-NKimK-HBiological evaluation of chitosan nanofiber membrane for guided bone regeneration. J Periodontol. 2005;76(10):1778–1784.
267.
XuCLeiCMengLChitosan as a barrier membrane material in periodontal tissue regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2012;100(5):1435–1443.
268.
KnightDAHolgateST.The airway epithelium: structural and functional properties in health and disease. Respirology. 2003;8(4):432–446.
269.
TsaoC-KKoC-YYangS-RAn ectopic approach for engineering a vascularized tracheal substitute. Biomaterials. 2014;35(4):1163–1175.
270.
KarpPMoningerTPary WeberSAn in vitro model of differentiated human airway epithelia. epithelial cell culture protocols. In: WiseC, editor. Methods in molecular medicine™. Vol. 188. New York (NY): Humana Press; 2002. p. 115–137.
271.
KanemaruS-iOmoriKYamashitaMRegeneration of the Trachea. Regenerative Medicine in Otolaryngology. In: Ito J, editor. p. 225–234 2015: Tokyo: Springer.
272.
DelaerePMolitorM.Tracheal allotransplantation and regeneration. Acta Chir Plast. 2017;58(1):29–38.
273.
WangJSunBTianLEvaluation of the potential of rhTGF-β3 encapsulated P (LLA-CL)/collagen nanofibers for tracheal cartilage regeneration using mesenchymal stems cells derived from Wharton’s jelly of human umbilical cord. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;70:637–645.
274.
TeohGZCrowleyCBirchallMADevelopment of resorbable nanocomposite tracheal and bronchial scaffolds for paediatric applications. Br J Surg. 2015;102(2):e140–e150.
275.
ShinYS.Tissue-Engineered tracheal regeneration: current status. Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2017;60(4):153–157.
276.
GhorbaniFMoradiLShadmehrMBIn-vivo characterization of a 3D hybrid scaffold based on PCL/decellularized aorta for tracheal tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;81:74–83.
277.
VacantiCAPaigeKTKimWSExperimental tracheal replacement using tissue-engineered cartilage. J Pediatr Surg. 1994;29(2):201–205.
278.
KojimaKBonassarLJRoyAKA composite tissue-engineered trachea using sheep nasal chondrocyte and epithelial cells. FASEB J. 2003;17(8):823–828.
279.
ten HallersEJORakhorstGMarresHAMAnimal models for tracheal research. Biomaterials. 2004;25(9):1533–1543.
280.
RotterNUngFRoyAKRole for interleukin 1alpha in the inhibition of chondrogenesis in autologous implants using polyglycolic acid-polylactic acid scaffolds. Tissue Eng. 2005;11(1–2):192–200.
281.
WuWChengXZhaoYTissue engineering of trachea-like cartilage grafts by using chondrocyte macroaggregate: experimental study in rabbits. Artif Organs. 2007;31(11):826–834.
282.
WeidenbecherMTuckerHMAwadallahAFabrication of a neotrachea using engineered cartilage. Laryngoscope. 2008;118(4):593–598.
283.
KomuraMKomuraHKanamoriYAn animal model study for tissue-engineered trachea fabricated from a biodegradable scaffold using chondrocytes to augment repair of tracheal stenosis. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43(12):2141–2146.
284.
LinC-HHsuS-hHuangC-EA scaffold-bioreactor system for a tissue-engineered trachea. Biomaterials. 2009;30(25):4117–4126.
285.
KobayashiKSuzukiTNomotoYA tissue-engineered trachea derived from a framed collagen scaffold, gingival fibroblasts and adipose-derived stem cells. Biomaterials. 2010;31(18):4855–4863.
286.
TatekawaYIkadaYKomuroHExperimental repair of tracheal defect using a bioabsorbable copolymer. J Surg Res. 2010;160(1):114–121.
287.
HindererSSchesnyMBayrakAEngineering of fibrillar decorin matrices for a tissue-engineered trachea. Biomaterials. 2012;33(21):5259–5266.
288.
HutmacherDWSchantzJTLamCXFState of the art and future directions of scaffold-based bone engineering from a biomaterials perspective. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1(4):245–260.
289.
WeinerSWagnerHD.The material bone: structure-mechanical function relations. Annu Rev Mater Sci. 1998;28(1):271–298.
290.
PeránMGarcíaMALópez-RuizEFunctionalized nanostructures with application in regenerative medicine. Int J Mol Sci. 2012;13(3):3847–3886.
291.
Diaz-GomezLGarcía-GonzálezCAWangJBiodegradable PCL/fibroin/hydroxyapatite porous scaffolds prepared by supercritical foaming for bone regeneration. Int J Pharm. 2017;527:115–125.
292.
DorozhkinS.Calcium orthophosphate-based biocomposites and hybrid biomaterials. J Mater Sci. 2009;44(9):2343–2387.
293.
HaiderAHaiderSHanSSRecent advances in the synthesis, functionalization and biomedical applications of hydroxyapatite: a review. RSC Adv. 2017;7(13):7442–7458.
294.
BonfieldWGrynpasMDTullyAEHydroxyapatite reinforced polyethylene – a mechanically compatible implant material for bone replacement. Biomaterials. 1981;2(3):185–186.
295.
SuchanekWYoshimuraM.Processing and properties of hydroxyapatite-based biomaterials for use as hard tissue replacement implants. J Mater Res. 1998;13(1):94–117.
296.
LiJFartashBHermanssonL.Hydroxyapatite – alumina composites and bone-bonding. Biomaterials. 1995;16(5):417–422.
297.
ZhengXHuangMDingC.Bond strength of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite/Ti composite coatings. Biomaterials. 2000;21(8):841–849.
298.
BrownAZakySRayHJrPorous magnesium/PLGA composite scaffolds for enhanced bone regeneration following tooth extraction. Acta Biomater. 2015;11(0):543–553.
299.
MochalinVNGogotsiY.Biomedical applications of diamond nanoparticles. Meeting Abstracts. 2015;MA2015-01(5):766.
300.
Araujo-PiresACMendesVCFerreira-JuniorOInvestigation of a novel PLGA/CaP scaffold in the healing of tooth extraction sockets to alveolar bone preservation in humans. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(3):559–570.
301.
Arun KumarRSivashanmugamADeepthiSInjectable chitin-poly(ε-caprolactone)/nanohydroxyapatite composite microgels prepared by simple regeneration technique for bone tissue engineering. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2015;7(18):9399–9409.
302.
GuarinoVUrciuoloFAlvarez-PerezMAOsteogenic differentiation and mineralization in fibre-reinforced tubular scaffolds: theoretical study and experimental evidences. J R Soc Interface. 2012;9(74):2201–2212.
303.
RezwanKChenQZBlakerJJBiodegradable and bioactive porous polymer/inorganic composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006;27(18):3413–3431.
304.
DangMKohAJJinXLocal pulsatile PTH delivery regenerates bone defects via enhanced bone remodeling in a cell-free scaffold. Biomaterials. 2017;114:1–9.
305.
HajialiFTajbakhshSShojaeiA.Fabrication and properties of polycaprolactone composites containing calcium phosphate-based ceramics and bioactive glasses in bone tissue engineering: a review. Polym Rev. 2018;58:164–207.
306.
Ishiko-UzukaRAnadaTKobayashiKOriented bone regenerative capacity of octacalcium phosphate/gelatin composites obtained through two-step crystal preparation method. J Biomed Mater Res Part B. 2017;105(5):1029–1039.
307.
NazeerMAYilgörEYilgörI.Intercalated chitosan/hydroxyapatite nanocomposites: promising materials for bone tissue engineering applications. Carbohydr Polym. 2017;175:38–46.
308.
YaoQCosmeJGXuTThree dimensional electrospun PCL/PLA blend nanofibrous scaffolds with significantly improved stem cells osteogenic differentiation and cranial bone formation. Biomaterials. 2017;115:115–127.
309.
ItoTHashimotoYBabaSBone regeneration with a collagen model polypeptides/α-tricalcium phosphate sponge in a canine tibia defect model. Implant Dent. 2015;24(2):197–203.
310.
ChenGSatoTTanakaJPreparation of a biphasic scaffold for osteochondral tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2006;26(1):118–123.
311.
HsuS-hChangS-HYenH-JEvaluation of biodegradable polyesters modified by type II collagen and Arg-Gly-Asp as tissue engineering scaffolding materials for cartilage regeneration. Artif Organs. 2006;30(1):42–55.
312.
DayRMMaquetVBoccacciniARIn vitro and in vivo analysis of macroporous biodegradable poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) scaffolds containing bioactive glass. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2005;75A(4):778–787.
313.
AskarzadehKOrangFMoztarzadehF.Fabrication and characterization of a porous composite scaffold based on gelatin and hydroxyapatite for bone tissue engineering. Iran Polym J. 2005;14(6):511–520.
314.
WanCFrydrychMChenB.Strong and bioactive gelatin-graphene oxide nanocomposites. Soft Matter. 2011;7(13):6159–6166.
315.
RajkhowaRGilESKlugeJReinforcing silk scaffolds with silk particles. Macromol Biosci. 2010;10(6):599–611.
316.
ShinSRBaeHChaJMCarbon nanotube reinforced hybrid microgels as scaffold materials for cell encapsulation. ACS Nano. 2011;6(1):362–372.
317.
GoncalvesGCruzSMARamalhoAGraphene oxide versus functionalized carbon nanotubes as a reinforcing agent in a PMMA/HA bone cement. Nanoscale. 2012;4(9):2937–2945.
318.
SiqueiraIAWBCoratMAFCavalcantiBIn vitro and in vivo studies of novel poly(d,l-lactic acid), superhydrophilic carbon nanotubes, and nanohydroxyapatite scaffolds for bone regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interf. 2015;7(18):9385–9398.
319.
NeelgundGMOkiALuoZ.In situ deposition of hydroxyapatite on graphene nanosheets. Mater Res Bull. 2013;48(2):175–179.
320.
GaoFXuCHuHBiomimetic synthesis and characterization of hydroxyapatite/graphene oxide hybrid coating on Mg alloy with enhanced corrosion resistance. Mater Lett. 2015;138(0):25–28.
321.
WuCXiaLHanPGraphene-oxide-modified β-tricalcium phosphate bioceramics stimulate in vitro and in vivo osteogenesis. Carbon N Y. 2015;93(0):116–129.
322.
ManithaNNancyDAmitGKGraphene oxide nanoflakes incorporated gelatin–hydroxyapatite scaffolds enhance osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. Nanotechnology. 2015;26(16):161001.
323.
Ali-BoucettaHBitounisDRaveendran-NairRPurified graphene oxide dispersions lack In vitro cytotoxicity and in vivo pathogenicity. Adv Healthc Mater. 2013;2(3):433–441.
324.
AgarwalSZhouXYeFInterfacing live cells with nanocarbon substrates. Langmuir. 2010;26(4):2244–2247.
325.
KalbacovaMBrozAKongJGraphene substrates promote adherence of human osteoblasts and mesenchymal stromal cells. Carbon N Y. 2010;48(15):4323–4329.
326.
SupronowiczPRAjayanPMUllmannKRNovel current-conducting composite substrates for exposing osteoblasts to alternating current stimulation. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;59(3):499–506.
RamanathanTAbdalaAAStankovichSFunctionalized graphene sheets for polymer nanocomposites. Nat Nano. 2008;3(6):327–331.
332.
KuillaTBhadraSYaoDRecent advances in graphene based polymer composites. Prog Polym Sci. 2010;35(11):1350–1375.
333.
XuYHongWBaiHStrong and ductile poly(vinyl alcohol)/graphene oxide composite films with a layered structure. Carbon N Y. 2009;47(15):3538–3543.
334.
AcocellaFBrizzolaS.12 – Tracheal tissue regeneration. Electrospinning for tissue regeneration. In: Bosworth LA, Downes S, editors. p. 242–279, 2011: United Kingdom: Woodhead Publishing Limited.
335.
WallesT.Tracheobronchial bio-engineering: biotechnology fulfilling unmet medical needs. Adv Drug Del Rev. 2011;63(4–5):367–374.
336.
ChenK-YLinK-CChenY-SA novel porous gelatin composite containing Naringin for bone repair. Evid Based Complementary Alternat Med. 2013;2013:10.
337.
ShahNJHongJHyderMNOsteophilic multilayer coatings for accelerated bone tissue growth. Adv Mater. 2012;24(11):1445–1450.
338.
ChaiYCCarlierABolanderJCurrent views on calcium phosphate osteogenicity and the translation into effective bone regeneration strategies. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(11):3876–3887.
339.
LüL-XZhangX-FWangY-YEffects of hydroxyapatite-containing composite nanofibers on osteogenesis of mesenchymal stem cells in vitro and bone regeneration in vivo. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2012;5(2):319–330.
340.
BoseSRoyMBandyopadhyayA.Recent advances in bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Trends Biotechnol. 2012;30(10):546–554.
341.
Sinha RayS.Polylactide-based bionanocomposites: a promising class of hybrid materials. Acc Chem Res. 2012;45(10):1710–1720.
342.
DewLMacNeilSChongCK.Vascularization strategies for tissue engineers. Regen Med. 2015;10(2):211–224.
343.
des RieuxAUcakarBMupendwaBPK3D systems delivering VEGF to promote angiogenesis for tissue engineering. J Controlled Release. 2011;150(3):272–278.
344.
LeeKSilvaEAMooneyDJ.Growth factor delivery-based tissue engineering: general approaches and a review of recent developments. J R Soc Interface. 2011;8(55):153–170.
345.
MatsudaKFalkenbergKJWoodsAAAdipose-derived stem cells promote angiogenesis and tissue formation for in vivo tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A. 2013;19(11–12):1327–1335.
346.
EastonCDBullockAGigliobiancoGApplication of layer-by-layer coatings to tissue scaffolds – development of an angiogenic biomaterial. J Mater Chem B. 2014;2(34):5558–5568.
