Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.2
3.4
Journals
Materials
Special Issues
Biological Materials in Health and Disease
materials-logo
Submit to Materials Review for Materials Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Biological Materials in Health and Disease

A special issue of Materials (ISSN 1996-1944). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomaterials".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 April 2022) | Viewed by 3378

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Dale Feldman

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
Interests: biomaterials; biomaterial enhanced regeneration; degradable scaffolds; skin and bone healing; assessments of wound healing
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The emphasis of this issue is on materials that either are found in the body or produced by introduction of a biomaterial. Specifically, how the geometry and chemistry of the biomaterial (or substances produced in vivo) lead to an adaptive response that can span from regenerative healing to disease inducing.

I plan to write review articles exploring the two extremes of the adaptive response: regenerative healing and pathological response. On the regenerative side, it will explore the probable reasons for loss of developmental regenerative healing (epimorphic regeneration), as well as strategies to recover lost function. On the pathological side, the circumstances under which size and/or chemistry can control the adaptive response will be explored. One of the main differences between an epimorphic regeneration adaptive response vs. a pathological one, is whether or not inflammation occurs. Therefore, how size and chemistry influence the inflammatory response, will be a main emphasis.

The other papers in this issue will look at the typical adaptive response to a biological material. The papers will also include one or more of the following: 1) characterization of the adaptive response, 2) typical trajectory of the adaptive response over time, 3) things that move the trajectory more to the pathological side, or 4) strategies to move it more to the regenerative side.

Dr. Dale Feldman
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Biological materials
  • Adaptive response
  • Biocompatibility
  • Tissue engineering
  • Regenerative medicine

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Review

35 pages, 4542 KiB  
Review
Designing a Biomaterial Approach to Control the Adaptive Response to a Skin Injury
by Dale Feldman
Materials 2022, 15(18), 6366; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15186366 - 13 Sep 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1314
Abstract
The goal of this review is to explain how to design a biomaterial approach to control the adaptive response to injury, with an emphasis on skin wounds. The strategies will be selected based on whether they have a reasonable probability of meeting the [...] Read more.
The goal of this review is to explain how to design a biomaterial approach to control the adaptive response to injury, with an emphasis on skin wounds. The strategies will be selected based on whether they have a reasonable probability of meeting the desired clinical outcome vs. just comparing the pros and cons of different strategies. To do this, the review will look at the normal adaptive response in adults and why it does not meet the desired clinical outcome in most cases. In addition, the adaptive response will be looked at in cases where it does meet the clinical performance requirements including animals that regenerate and for fetal wound healing. This will lead to how biomaterials can be used to alter the overall adaptive response to allow it to meet the desired clinical outcome. The important message of the review is that you need to use the engineering design process, not the scientific method, to design a clinical treatment. Also, the clinical performance requirements are functional, not structural. The last section will give some specific examples of controlling the adaptive response for two skin injuries: burns and pressure ulcers. For burns, it will cover some preclinical studies used to justify a clinical study as well as discuss the results of a clinical study using this system. For pressure ulcers, it will cover some preclinical studies for two different approaches: electrical stimulation and degradable/regenerative scaffolds. For electrical stimulation, the results of a clinical study will be presented. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biological Materials in Health and Disease)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 847 KiB  
Review
The Effect of Size of Materials Formed or Implanted In Vivo on the Macrophage Response and the Resultant Influence on Clinical Outcome
by Dale Feldman
Materials 2021, 14(16), 4572; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14164572 - 14 Aug 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1924
Abstract
Both the chemistry and size of a material formed in vivo, or an implanted biomaterial, can alter the in vivo host response. Within the size range covered within this review, over 1 μm, chemistry is only important if the solid material is unstable [...] Read more.
Both the chemistry and size of a material formed in vivo, or an implanted biomaterial, can alter the in vivo host response. Within the size range covered within this review, over 1 μm, chemistry is only important if the solid material is unstable and leeching small molecules. The macrophage activity and the resultant inflammatory response, however, are related to the size of the solid material. The premise of this review is that differences in size of the solid material, in different cases, can be the reason why there is some individual-to-individual variation in response. Specifically, the inflammatory response is enhanced when the size is between 1–50 μm. This will be looked at for three configurations: spherical particulate (silicone oil or gel from breast implants), elongated particulate (monosodium urate [MSU] crystals in gout or in kidney stones), and fibers (e.g., polyester used in fabric implants). These specific examples were selected because many still believe that the clinical outcome for each is controlled by the surface chemistry, when in fact it is the size. In each case, specific studies will be highlighted to either show a mechanism for creating different sizes and therefore a differential biological response (first three) or how changing the size and shape (diameter and spacing of fibers, in this example) can affect the response and can help explain the different responses to fabric implants found in vivo within the 1–50 μm size range. It was found that polyester fibers under 70 μm had a significant increase in macrophage response. Further, it was found that compounds found in synovial fluid could limit MSU crystal size. In addition, it was shown that plasma with low triglyceride levels emulsifies silicone oils to a greater extent than plasma with higher triglyceride levels. Therefore, in three cases it appears that differences in the inflammatory response between individuals and between different implants could be explained just by the size of the material formed or implanted. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biological Materials in Health and Disease)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop