Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34830229›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

The Emerging Role of Decellularized Plant-Based Scaffolds as a New Biomaterial.

Ashlee F Harris, Jerome Lacombe, Frederic Zenhausern

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Development of a Scaffold from the Cob ofJournal of functional biomaterials · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cellulose Plant-Derived Scaffolds as a Tool for Myometrium Modeling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Decellularized Persian walnut leaf (Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ashlee F HarrisCenter for Applied NanoBioscience and Medicine, College of Medicine Phoenix, University of Arizona, 475 North 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Jerome LacombeCenter for Applied NanoBioscience and Medicine, College of Medicine Phoenix, University of Arizona, 475 North 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Frederic ZenhausernCenter for Applied NanoBioscience and Medicine, College of Medicine Phoenix, University of Arizona, 475 North 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
University of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The decellularization of plant-based biomaterials to generate tissue-engineered substitutes or in vitro cellular models has significantly increased in recent years. These vegetal tissues can be sourced from plant leaves and stems or fruits and vegetables, making them a low-cost, accessible, and sustainable resource from which to generate three-dimensional scaffolds. Each construct is distinct, representing a wide range of architectural and mechanical properties as well as innate vasculature networks. Based on the rapid rise in interest, this review aims to detail the current state of the art and presents the future challenges and perspectives of these unique biomaterials. First, we consider the different existing decellularization techniques, including chemical, detergent-free, enzymatic, and supercritical fluid approaches that are used to generate such scaffolds and examine how these protocols can be selected based on plant cellularity. We next examine strategies for cell seeding onto the plant-derived constructs and the importance of the different functionalization methods used to assist in cell adhesion and promote cell viability. Finally, we discuss how their structural features, such as inherent vasculature, porosity, morphology, and mechanical properties (i.e., stiffness, elasticity, etc.) position plant-based scaffolds as a unique biomaterial and drive their use for specific downstream applications. The main challenges in the field are presented throughout the discussion, and future directions are proposed to help improve the development and use of vegetal constructs in biomedical research.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsBiomechanical PhenomenaCell AdhesionCell SurvivalCelluloseDetergentsElastic ModulusEukaryotic CellsExtracellular MatrixHumansPlant CellsPlant LeavesPlantsPlant StemsSolventsBiocompatible MaterialsCelluloseDetergentsSolventsbiomaterialcellulosedecellularizationplant-based scaffoldstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID34830229
PMCPMC8625747
OpenAlexW3213328691

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.