ReviewBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica2025
Biological responses to biomaterials: a review.
Review in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Following Unintentional Extrusion of Cold Ceramic: A Case Series of Three Patients.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Immune-epigenetic convergence in biomaterial-guided tissue regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Advancements in pediatric tissue engineering: scaffold-based and cell-driven approaches.Cell and tissue banking · 2026Review
- From Nature to Innovation: Exploring Natural Biopolymers in 3D Bioprinting for Bone Regeneration.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Sintering Method-Dependent Hydroxyapatite Coatings Drive Enhanced Gingival Fibroblast Behavior on Titanium Implant Surfaces.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Spatially controlled Islet delivery into a bioengineered vascular Niche improves subcutaneous transplantation.Biomedical microdevices · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of synthetic absorbable mesh use in breast surgery: First case series in reconstruction and aesthetic mastopexy.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- Multiscale Interface Engineering for Orthopedic and Dental Implants: A Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Host-Pathogen Crosstalk in Pediatric Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis: Molecular Mechanisms Driving Peritoneal Membrane Remodeling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Therapeutic Biomaterials for Chronic Osteomyelitis: Time-Space-Control Strategies for Infection Control and Bone Repair-A Narrative Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Development of a Non-Contact Flow Sensor Based on a Permanent Magnet Metal Clip for Monitoring Circulation Status.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Recent advances in multimodal foundation model-enabled peptide screening and optimization for smart biomaterials and functional tissue engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Injury to tissue caused by device penetration of the skin triggers formation of extracellular traps.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Smart biomaterials: as active immune modulators to shape pro-regenerative microenvironments.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomaterials stimulate diverse biological responses, including inflammation, wound healing, foreign body reactions, and fibrous encapsulation, all critical for evaluating biocompatibility and effectiveness. These responses are influenced by the material's physicochemical and biological properties, such as composition, texture, and surface characteristics. Adverse reactions, such as severe inflammation or fibrous encapsulation, can hinder tissue integration, jeopardizing patient health and increasing healthcare costs. This review aimed to summarize the current scientific evidence on biological responses to biomaterials. A systematic search was conducted through multiple databases (VHL, PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and Web of Science) including in vitro and in vivo studies that compared biomaterial interactions with the natural immune response (innate and adaptive). From the 791 articles identified, 25 met strict inclusion criteria. These studies revealed variations in immune responses and material surface characteristics, highlighting advancements made to enhance tissue integration. Bioactive materials demonstrated greater potential for tissue regeneration, while inert materials triggered moderate inflammatory reactions. This variability emphasizes the need for a personalized biomaterial selection, considering both short-term biocompatibility and long-term tissue functionality. This review underscores the importance of comprehensive evaluation to optimize biomaterial performance in clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.