24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Recent advances in regenerative biomaterials

      review-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Nowadays, biomaterials have evolved from the inert supports or functional substitutes to the bioactive materials able to trigger or promote the regenerative potential of tissues. The interdisciplinary progress has broadened the definition of ‘biomaterials’, and a typical new insight is the concept of tissue induction biomaterials. The term ‘regenerative biomaterials’ and thus the contents of this article are relevant to yet beyond tissue induction biomaterials. This review summarizes the recent progress of medical materials including metals, ceramics, hydrogels, other polymers and bio-derived materials. As the application aspects are concerned, this article introduces regenerative biomaterials for bone and cartilage regeneration, cardiovascular repair, 3D bioprinting, wound healing and medical cosmetology. Cell-biomaterial interactions are highlighted. Since the global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, the review particularly mentions biomaterials for public health emergency. In the last section, perspectives are suggested: (i) creation of new materials is the source of innovation; (ii) modification of existing materials is an effective strategy for performance improvement; (iii) biomaterial degradation and tissue regeneration are required to be harmonious with each other; (iv) host responses can significantly influence the clinical outcomes; (v) the long-term outcomes should be paid more attention to; (vi) the noninvasive approaches for monitoring in vivo dynamic evolution are required to be developed; (vii) public health emergencies call for more research and development of biomaterials; and (viii) clinical translation needs to be pushed forward in a full-chain way. In the future, more new insights are expected to be shed into the brilliant field—regenerative biomaterials.

          Graphical Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references500

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

          Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Imbalanced Host Response to SARS-CoV-2 Drives Development of COVID-19

            Summary Viral pandemics, such as the one caused by SARS-CoV-2, pose an imminent threat to humanity. Because of its recent emergence, there is a paucity of information regarding viral behavior and host response following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we offer an in-depth analysis of the transcriptional response to SARS-CoV-2 compared with other respiratory viruses. Cell and animal models of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in addition to transcriptional and serum profiling of COVID-19 patients, consistently revealed a unique and inappropriate inflammatory response. This response is defined by low levels of type I and III interferons juxtaposed to elevated chemokines and high expression of IL-6. We propose that reduced innate antiviral defenses coupled with exuberant inflammatory cytokine production are the defining and driving features of COVID-19.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification.

              Microenvironments appear important in stem cell lineage specification but can be difficult to adequately characterize or control with soft tissues. Naive mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are shown here to specify lineage and commit to phenotypes with extreme sensitivity to tissue-level elasticity. Soft matrices that mimic brain are neurogenic, stiffer matrices that mimic muscle are myogenic, and comparatively rigid matrices that mimic collagenous bone prove osteogenic. During the initial week in culture, reprogramming of these lineages is possible with addition of soluble induction factors, but after several weeks in culture, the cells commit to the lineage specified by matrix elasticity, consistent with the elasticity-insensitive commitment of differentiated cell types. Inhibition of nonmuscle myosin II blocks all elasticity-directed lineage specification-without strongly perturbing many other aspects of cell function and shape. The results have significant implications for understanding physical effects of the in vivo microenvironment and also for therapeutic uses of stem cells.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Regen Biomater
                Regen Biomater
                rb
                Regenerative Biomaterials
                Oxford University Press
                2056-3418
                2056-3426
                2022
                05 December 2022
                05 December 2022
                : 9
                : rbac098
                Affiliations
                State Key Laboratory of Molecular Engineering of Polymers, Department of Macromolecular Science, Fudan University , Shanghai 200438, China
                State Key Laboratory of Molecular Engineering of Polymers, Department of Macromolecular Science, Fudan University , Shanghai 200438, China
                Author notes
                Correspondence address. E-mail: jdding1@ 123456fudan.edu.cn
                Article
                rbac098
                10.1093/rb/rbac098
                9745784
                36518879
                654a624f-9ce3-4c53-8c31-b66b06592185
                © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 8 September 2022
                : 23 November 2022
                : 1 December 2022
                : 13 December 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 37
                Funding
                Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China, DOI 10.13039/501100001809;
                Award ID: 52130302
                Categories
                Review
                AcademicSubjects/MED00010
                AcademicSubjects/SCI01410

                regenerative biomaterial,tissue induction biomaterial,medical material,tissue regeneration

                Comments

                Comment on this article