Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36097597›Full record

ReviewMaterials today. Bio2022

Scaffolds in the microbial resistant era: Fabrication, materials, properties and tissue engineering applications.

Ángel Serrano-Aroca, Alba Cano-Vicent, Roser Sabater I Serra, Mohamed El-Tanani, AlaaAA Aljabali, Murtaza M Tambuwala, Yogendra Kumar Mishra

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials today. Bio, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.9field-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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 131 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Tissue-Engineered Tracheal Reconstruction.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Fabrication of Magnetic Poly(L-lactide) (PLLA)/FeMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Ángel Serrano-ArocaBiomaterials and Bioengineering Lab, Centro de Investigación Traslacional San Alberto Magno, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, C/Guillem de Castro 94, 46001, Valencia, Spain.
Alba Cano-VicentBiomaterials and Bioengineering Lab, Centro de Investigación Traslacional San Alberto Magno, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, C/Guillem de Castro 94, 46001, Valencia, Spain.
Roser Sabater I SerraCentre for Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022, València, Spain.
Mohamed El-TananiPharmacological and Diagnostic Research Centre, Faculty of Pharmacy, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, 19328, Jordan.
AlaaAA AljabaliDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Yarmouk University, Irbid, 21163, Jordan.
Murtaza M TambuwalaSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Science, Ulster University, Coleraine, BT52 1SA, UK.
Yogendra Kumar MishraMads Clausen Institute, NanoSYD, University of Southern Denmark, Alsion 2, 6400, Sønderborg, Denmark.
Valencia Catholic University Saint Vincent Martyr · ESAl-Ahliyya Amman University · JOUniversitat Politècnica de València · ESUniversity of Southern Denmark · DKUniversity of Ulster · GBYarmouk University · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to microbial infections dramatically affect cell survival and increase the risk of implant failure, scaffolds produced with antimicrobial materials are now much more likely to be successful. Multidrug-resistant infections without suitable prevention strategies are increasing at an alarming rate. The ability of cells to organize, develop, differentiate, produce a functioning extracellular matrix (ECM) and create new functional tissue can all be controlled by careful control of the extracellular microenvironment. This review covers the present state of advanced strategies to develop scaffolds with antimicrobial properties for bone, oral tissue, skin, muscle, nerve, trachea, cardiac and other tissue engineering applications. The review focuses on the development of antimicrobial scaffolds against bacteria and fungi using a wide range of materials, including polymers, biopolymers, glass, ceramics and antimicrobials agents such as antibiotics, antiseptics, antimicrobial polymers, peptides, metals, carbon nanomaterials, combinatorial strategies, and includes discussions on the antimicrobial mechanisms involved in these antimicrobial approaches. The toxicological aspects of these advanced scaffolds are also analyzed to ensure future technological transfer to clinics. The main antimicrobial methods of characterizing scaffolds' antimicrobial and antibiofilm properties are described. The production methods of these porous supports, such as electrospinning, phase separation, gas foaming, the porogen method, polymerization in solution, fiber mesh coating, self-assembly, membrane lamination, freeze drying, 3D printing and bioprinting, among others, are also included in this article. These important advances in antimicrobial materials-based scaffolds for regenerative medicine offer many new promising avenues to the material design and tissue-engineering communities.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial activityBiomaterialsFabricationScaffoldsTissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID36097597
PMCPMC9463390
OpenAlexW4293729933

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.