The Synergy of Scaffold-Based and Scaffold-Free Tissue Engineering Strategies
Abstract
Tissue engineering (TE) is a highly interdisciplinary research field driven by the goal to restore, replace, or regenerate defective tissues. Throughout more than two decades of intense research, different technological approaches, which can be principally categorized into scaffold-based and scaffold-free strategies, have been developed. In this opinion article, we discuss the emergence of a third strategy in TE. This synergetic strategy integrates the advantages of both of these traditional approaches, while being clearly distinct from them. Its characteristic attributes, numerous practical benefits, and recent literature reports supporting our opinion, are discussed in detail.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
PLCL scaffolds with different pore structures and porosity can be obtained by various preparation methods (electrospinning, 3D printing, supercritical carbon dioxide foaming, gel extrusion, freeze-drying) to better simulate ECM structure of different positions and types of cartilage tissue.
“PLCL scaffolds with different pore structures and porosity can be obtained by various preparation methods, such as electrospinning, 3D printing, supercritical carbon dioxide foaming, gel extrusion and freeze-drying, so as to better simulate the extracellular matrix structure of different positions and different types of cartilage tissue [193].”
From Application of PLCL as a biodegradable polymer in biomedical engineering (2026) · cites this paper as [193]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 314
- Authors
- Ovsianikov, A., Khademhosseini, A., & Mironov, V.
- Affiliations
- TU Wien (AT)
- California NanoSystems Institute (US)
- Sechenov University (RU)
- Corresponding author
- Ovsianikov, Aleksandr
- Venue
- Trends in Biotechnology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-04
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 348-357
- ISSN
- 0167-7799 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2788373790
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 10
- FWCI
- 7.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Trends in biotechnology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- European Research Council (307701)
- Austrian Science Fund (I2444-N28)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
- Keywords
- tissue engineering, tissue regeneration, tissue replacement
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Bone and Bones, Cell Differentiation, Humans, Robotics, Spheroids, Cellular, Tissue Engineering, Biomimetics, Regenerative Medicine, Mice, Tissue Scaffolds, Mesenchymal Stem Cells, Printing, Three-Dimensional
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
