Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2021.07.008
DC FieldValue
dc.titleOsteochondral tissue engineering: Perspectives for clinical application and preclinical development
dc.contributor.authorAi, Chengchong
dc.contributor.authorLee, Yee Han Dave
dc.contributor.authorTan, Xuan Hao
dc.contributor.authorTan, Si Heng Sharon
dc.contributor.authorHui, James Hoi Po
dc.contributor.authorGoh, James Cho-Hong
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-26T09:08:17Z
dc.date.available2022-10-26T09:08:17Z
dc.date.issued2021-09-01
dc.identifier.citationAi, Chengchong, Lee, Yee Han Dave, Tan, Xuan Hao, Tan, Si Heng Sharon, Hui, James Hoi Po, Goh, James Cho-Hong (2021-09-01). Osteochondral tissue engineering: Perspectives for clinical application and preclinical development. Journal of Orthopaedic Translation 30 : 93-102. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2021.07.008
dc.identifier.issn2214-031X
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/233648
dc.description.abstractThe treatment of osteochondral defects (OCD) remains challenging. Among currently available surgical treatments for OCDs, scaffold-based treatments are promising to regenerate the osteochondral unit. However, there is still no consensus regarding the clinical effectiveness of these scaffold-based therapies for OCDs. Previous reviews have described the gradient physiological characteristics of osteochondral tissue and gradient scaffold design for OCD, tissue engineering strategies, biomaterials, and fabrication technologies. However, the discussion on bridging the gap between the clinical need and preclinical research is still limited, on which we focus in the present review, providing an insight into what is currently lacking in tissue engineering methods that failed to yield satisfactory outcomes, and what is needed to further improve these techniques. Currently available surgical treatments for OCDs are firstly summarized, followed by a comprehensive review on experimental animal studies in recent 5 years on osteochondral tissue engineering. The review will then conclude with what is currently lacking in these animal studies and the recommendations that would help enlighten the community in developing more clinically relevant implants. The translational potential of this article: This review is attempting to summarize the lessons from clinical and preclinical failures, providing an insight into what is currently lacking in TE methods that failed to yield satisfactory outcomes, and what is needed to further improve these implants. © 2021 The Authors
dc.publisherElsevier (Singapore) Pte Ltd
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourceScopus OA2021
dc.subjectAnimal experiment
dc.subjectOsteochondral regeneration
dc.subjectScaffold
dc.subjectSubchondral bone
dc.typeReview
dc.contributor.departmentCOLLEGE OF DESIGN AND ENGINEERING
dc.contributor.departmentORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY
dc.description.doi10.1016/j.jot.2021.07.008
dc.description.sourcetitleJournal of Orthopaedic Translation
dc.description.volume30
dc.description.page93-102
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1016_j_jot_2021_07_008.pdf1.03 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons