Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Aug 8;14(15):3222.
doi: 10.3390/polym14153222.

In Vivo Bone Tissue Engineering Strategies: Advances and Prospects

Affiliations
Review

In Vivo Bone Tissue Engineering Strategies: Advances and Prospects

Ilya L Tsiklin et al. Polymers (Basel). .

Abstract

Reconstruction of critical-sized bone defects remains a tremendous challenge for surgeons worldwide. Despite the variety of surgical techniques, current clinical strategies for bone defect repair demonstrate significant limitations and drawbacks, including donor-site morbidity, poor anatomical match, insufficient bone volume, bone graft resorption, and rejection. Bone tissue engineering (BTE) has emerged as a novel approach to guided bone tissue regeneration. BTE focuses on in vitro manipulations with seed cells, growth factors and bioactive scaffolds using bioreactors. The successful clinical translation of BTE requires overcoming a number of significant challenges. Currently, insufficient vascularization is the critical limitation for viability of the bone tissue-engineered construct. Furthermore, efficacy and safety of the scaffolds cell-seeding and exogenous growth factors administration are still controversial. The in vivo bioreactor principle (IVB) is an exceptionally promising concept for the in vivo bone tissue regeneration in a predictable patient-specific manner. This concept is based on the self-regenerative capacity of the human body, and combines flap prefabrication and axial vascularization strategies. Multiple experimental studies on in vivo BTE strategies presented in this review demonstrate the efficacy of this approach. Routine clinical application of the in vivo bioreactor principle is the future direction of BTE; however, it requires further investigation for overcoming some significant limitations.

Keywords: axial vascularization; bioreactor; bone regeneration; bone tissue engineering; flap prefabrication; growth factors; in vivo bioreactor; scaffold; stem cells.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Key components of bone tissue regeneration (1-scaffold; 2-osteoprogenitor cells; 3-growth factors; 4-vascular network).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scaffold axial vascularization strategy—(a) flap-based approach; (b) vessel-based approach.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Vidal L., Kampleitner C., Brennan M.Á., Hoornaert A., Layrolle P. Reconstruction of Large Skeletal Defects: Current Clinical Therapeutic Strategies and Future Directions Using 3D Printing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2020;8:61. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00061. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Toogood P., Miclau T. Critical-Sized Bone Defects: Sequence and Planning. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2017;31((Suppl. S5)):S23–S26. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000980. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nkenke E., Neukam F.W. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: Morbidity, resorption and implant survival. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2014;7((Suppl. S2)):S203–S217. - PubMed
    1. Barone A., Ricci M., Mangano F., Covani U. Morbidity associated with iliac crest harvesting in the treatment of maxillary and mandibular atrophies: A 10-year analysis. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2011;69:2298–2304. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.01.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ritschl L.M., Mücke T., Hart D., Unterhuber T., Kehl V., Wolff K.D., Fichter A.M. Retrospective analysis of complications in 190 mandibular resections and simultaneous reconstructions with free fibula flap, iliac crest flap or reconstruction plate: A comparative single centre study. Clin. Oral Investig. 2021;25:2905–2914. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03607-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources