2018
DOI: 10.1080/00914037.2018.1452224
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Articular cartilage: New directions and barriers of scaffolds development – review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 137 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Devices are constantly being developed in an effort to address this currently unmet need with varying degrees of success [ 6 , 7 ]. The challenges and current device technologies to address regeneration have been recently reviewed for both articular cartilage [ 8 ] and the osteochondral interface [ 9 ]. Effective design requires intimate knowledge of the local tissue environment and matching of these mechanical properties with the intended device [ 10 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Devices are constantly being developed in an effort to address this currently unmet need with varying degrees of success [ 6 , 7 ]. The challenges and current device technologies to address regeneration have been recently reviewed for both articular cartilage [ 8 ] and the osteochondral interface [ 9 ]. Effective design requires intimate knowledge of the local tissue environment and matching of these mechanical properties with the intended device [ 10 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, this kind of membrane does not have suitable properties to create hyaline cartilage. As a result of regeneration, non-valuable fibrous cartilage is obtained, which is susceptible to future damage [ 40 , 50 , 51 , 57 , 76 , 111 , 156 , 173 ].…”
Section: Scaffolds For Cartilage Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phase inversion (dry and wet phase inversion), freeze‐extraction, thermally induced phase separation (TIPS), freeze‐drying (Pant et al, 2019; Pant, Sundaram, Goudie, Nguyen, & Handa, 2019), salt‐leaching, gas‐foaming, electrospinning (Dulnik, Kołbuk, Denis, & Sajkiewicz, 2018; Kołbuk, Urbanek, Denis, & Choińska, 2019), and rapid prototyping techniques: stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modeling (FDM) (Budnicka, Gadomska‐Gajadhur, & Ruśkowski, 2019; Kosik‐Koziol et al, 2019; Liu & Ma, 2004; Liu Tsang & Bhatia, 2004; Rezwan, Chen, Blaker, & Boccaccini, 2006) may be distinguished. All the above have their advantages and disadvantages, described, among others (Jeznach, Kolbuk, & Sajkiewicz, 2018; Urbanek, Kołbuk, & Wróbel, 2019). The freeze‐extraction method does not require specialist apparatus and provides the ability to change many factors affecting the structure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%