ReviewRegenerative medicine2025
Unlocking the potential of injectable hydrogels for cartilage repair.
Review in Regenerative medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Articular Cartilage Tissue Engineering: Cells, Bioinstructive Scaffolds, Immunological Microenvironment, and Emerging Technologies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cryogel-based therapeutic platforms for disease modification in osteoarthritis.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- A dual-functional hydrogel integrating adhesive and lubricating interfaces for mitochondrial protection-Driven cartilage regeneration.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- The osteochondral regeneration paradox: why biomimetic scaffolds are biologically superior but injectable systems dominate the clinic.RSC advances · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteoarthritis (OA), a prevalent degenerative joint disease, poses significant global health implications and is characterized by progressive degradation of articular cartilage, resulting in debilitating pain and disability. Current treatments often provide only symptomatic relief or require multiple invasive open-joint procedures that are both costly and surgically complex. This review intends to evaluate key design considerations, drawing inspiration from clinically approved therapeutics and recent advances in the field that can truly unlock the potential of injectable hydrogels in cartilage tissue engineering. These include the choice of cargo, hydrogel architecture, and critical factors that are often overlooked in injectable hydrogels, such as ensuring integration with native tissue and restoring joint lubrication. The manuscript also addresses key barriers to clinical translation, including navigating stringent regulatory pathways and optimizing hydrogel performance to meet the mechanical and biological demands of the joint environment. Finally, the review outlines future research directions with emphasis on acellular off-the-shelf strategies, and personalized medicine approaches informed by advances in -omics and high-throughput screening data to accelerate the clinical translation of next-generation injectable hydrogels for effective cartilage repair.
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.