The rapid development of tissue engineering makes it an effective strategy for repairing cartilage defects. The significant advantages of injectable hydrogels for cartilage injury include the properties of natural extracellular matrix (ECM), good biocompatibility, and strong plasticity to adapt to irregular cartilage defect surfaces. These inherent properties make injectable hydrogels a promising tool for cartilage tissue engineering. This paper reviews the research progress on advanced injectable hydrogels. The cross-linking method and structure of injectable hydrogels are thoroughly discussed. Furthermore, polymers, cells, and stimulators commonly used in the preparation of injectable hydrogels are thoroughly reviewed. Finally, we summarize the research progress of the latest advanced hydrogels for cartilage repair and the future challenges for injectable hydrogels.

The Achilles tendon (AT) is responsible for running, jumping, and standing. The AT injuries are very common in the population. In the adult population (21–60 years), the incidence of AT injuries is approximately 2.35 per 1,000 people. It negatively impacts people’s quality of life and increases the medical burden. Due to its low cellularity and vascular deficiency, AT has a poor healing ability. Therefore, AT injury healing has attracted a lot of attention from researchers. Current AT injury treatment options cannot effectively restore the mechanical structure and function of AT, which promotes the development of AT regenerative tissue engineering. Various nanofiber-based scaffolds are currently being explored due to their structural similarity to natural tendon and their ability to promote tissue regeneration. This review discusses current methods of AT regeneration, recent advances in the fabrication and enhancement of nanofiber-based scaffolds, and the development and use of multiscale nanofiber-based scaffolds for AT regeneration.

BackgroundBone metastasis is a common adverse event in kidney cancer, often resulting in poor survival. However, tools for predicting KCBM and assessing survival after KCBM have not performed well.MethodsThe study uses machine learning to build models for assessing kidney cancer bone metastasis risk, prognosis, and performance evaluation. We selected 71,414 kidney cancer patients from SEER database between 2010 and 2016. Additionally, 963 patients with kidney cancer from an independent medical center were chosen to validate the performance. In the next step, eight different machine learning methods were applied to develop KCBM diagnosis and prognosis models while the risk factors were identified from univariate and multivariate logistic regression and the prognosis factors were analyzed through Kaplan-Meier survival curve and Cox proportional hazards regression. The performance of the models was compared with current models, including the logistic regression model and the AJCC TNM staging model, applying receiver operating characteristics, decision curve analysis, and the calculation of accuracy and sensitivity in both internal and independent external cohorts.ResultsOur prognosis model achieved an AUC of 0.8269 (95%CI: 0.8083–0.8425) in the internal validation cohort and 0.9123 (95%CI: 0.8979–0.9261) in the external validation cohort. In addition, we tested the performance of the extreme gradient boosting model through decision curve analysis curve, Precision-Recall curve, and Brier score and two models exhibited excellent performance.ConclusionOur developed models can accurately predict the risk and prognosis of KCBM and contribute to helping improve decision-making.