Evidence mapPaperPMID 40710447Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025

Next-Generation Biomaterials for Load-Bearing Tissue Interfaces: Sensor-Integrated Scaffolds and Mechanoadaptive Constructs for Skeletal Regeneration.

Rahul Kumar, Kyle Sporn, Pranay Prabhakar, Phani Paladugu, Akshay Khanna, Alex Ngo, Chirag Gowda, Ethan Waisberg, Ram Jagadeesan, Nasif Zaman and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Three-dimensionally-printed biphasic PCL/Regenerative biomaterials · 2026
    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

11 authors.

Rahul KumarDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8574-2895
Kyle SpornDepartment of Medicine, Norton College of Medicine, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-5707-9009
Pranay PrabhakarDepartment of Medicine, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY 12208, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1374-1900
Phani PaladuguBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Akshay KhannaSidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-4384-2693
Alex NgoDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA.
Chirag GowdaDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-8177-2784
Ethan WaisbergDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK.
Ram JagadeesanWhiting School of Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Nasif ZamanSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA 94115, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0120-0939
Alireza TavakkoliDepartment of Computer Science, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9460-1269

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advancements in load-bearing tissue repair increasingly demand biomaterials that not only support structural integrity but also interact dynamically with the physiological environment. This review examines the latest progress in smart biomaterials designed for skeletal reconstruction, with emphasis on mechanoresponsive scaffolds, bioactive composites, and integrated microsensors for real-time monitoring. We explore material formulations that enhance osseointegration, resist micromotion-induced loosening, and modulate inflammatory responses at the bone-implant interface. Additionally, we assess novel fabrication methods-such as additive manufacturing and gradient-based material deposition-for tailoring stiffness, porosity, and degradation profiles to match host biomechanics. Special attention is given to sensor-augmented platforms capable of detecting mechanical strain, biofilm formation, and early-stage implant failure. Together, these technologies promise a new class of bioresponsive, diagnostic-capable constructs that extend beyond static support to become active agents in regenerative healing and post-operative monitoring. This multidisciplinary review integrates insights from materials science, mechanobiology, and device engineering to inform the future of implantable systems in skeletal tissue repair.

Indexed as

load-bearing interfacesmechanoadaptationorthopedic tissue engineeringosteoinductive biomaterialssensor-integrated scaffoldsskeletal regeneration

Identifiers

PMID40710447
PMCPMC12295659

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.