Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 278

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 152 of the 152 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Injectable hydrogel materials for spinal cord regeneration: a review

Open access
Macaya, D, Spector, M·2012·Biomedical Materials

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) presents a complex regenerative problem due to the multiple facets of growth inhibition that occur following trauma to the cord parenchyma and stroma. Clinically, SCI is further complicated by the heterogeneity in the size, shape and extent of human injuries. Many of these injuries do not breach the dura mater and have continuous viable axons through the injury site that can later lead to some degree of functional recovery. In these cases, surgical manipulation of the spinal cord by implanting a preformed scaffold or drug delivery device may lead to further damage. Given these circumstances, in situ-forming scaffolds are an attractive approach for SCI regeneration. These synthetic and natural polymers undergo a rapid transformation from liquid to gel upon injection into the cord tissue, conforming to the individual lesion site and directly integrating with the host tissue. Injectable materials can be formulated to have mechanical properties that closely match the native spinal cord extracellular matrix, and this may enhance axonal ingrowth. Such materials can also be loaded with cellular and molecular therapeutics to modulate the wound environment and enhance regeneration. This review will focus on the current status of in situ-forming materials for spinal cord repair. The advantages of, and requirements for, such polymers will be presented, and examples of the behavior of such systems in vitro and in vivo will be presented. There are helpful lessons to be learned from the investigations of injectable hydrogels for the treatment of SCI that apply to the use of these biomaterials for the treatment of lesions in other central nervous system tissues and in organs comprising other tissue types.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1748-6041/7/1/012001

Cites

152 of 152 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 152 references

Cited by

See all 278

Metadata

Authors
Macaya, D., & Spector, M.
Venue
Biomedical Materials
Published
2012-01-13
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
012001
ISSN
  • 1748-6041 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-605X
OpenAlex
W2111199947
Cited by
278
References
152
FWCI
10.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Injectable hydrogel materials for spinal cord regeneration: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1748-6041/7/1/012001
The paper
Macaya, D., & Spector, M. (2012). Injectable hydrogel materials for spinal cord regeneration: a review. Biomedical Materials. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/7/1/012001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.