Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review
Cell macroencapsulation devices (CMDs) represent a promising therapeutic approach by combining controlled, off-the-shelf technology with living tissue functionality. Despite their potential, the current knowledge about CMD development and implementation remains fragmented across different applicatio...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025-12-01
|
| Series: | Regenerative Therapy |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352320425001294 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850215546230931456 |
|---|---|
| author | Murillo D.L. Bernardi Natascha Rus Robin W.M. Vernooij Marianne C. Verhaar Maarten B. Rookmaaker |
| author_facet | Murillo D.L. Bernardi Natascha Rus Robin W.M. Vernooij Marianne C. Verhaar Maarten B. Rookmaaker |
| author_sort | Murillo D.L. Bernardi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Cell macroencapsulation devices (CMDs) represent a promising therapeutic approach by combining controlled, off-the-shelf technology with living tissue functionality. Despite their potential, the current knowledge about CMD development and implementation remains fragmented across different applications. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the available evidence on implantable CMDs and establish a comprehensive framework for their development. Our analysis cataloged studies based on device materials and design, cell types, implantation strategies, and evaluation methods. The review revealed that CMD development has largely progressed in application-specific silos, with varying approaches to device characterization, cell selection (from xenogeneic to autologous), and assessment methods. Key evaluation parameters included cell survival and functionality, host tissue response (inflammation, vascularization, and fibrosis), and therapeutic efficacy. While successful implementations exist across multiple applications, the lack of standardized development and evaluation protocols emerges as a significant barrier to cross-application advancement. These findings highlight the need for unified assessment frameworks to accelerate CMD development across therapeutic applications. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-d81f56a222054135b2eb6fdf0fac2146 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2352-3204 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-12-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Regenerative Therapy |
| spelling | doaj-art-d81f56a222054135b2eb6fdf0fac21462025-08-20T02:08:35ZengElsevierRegenerative Therapy2352-32042025-12-013014415610.1016/j.reth.2025.05.013Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic reviewMurillo D.L. Bernardi0Natascha Rus1Robin W.M. Vernooij2Marianne C. Verhaar3Maarten B. Rookmaaker4University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Nephrology, Utrecht, the NetherlandsIndependent Researcher, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Nephrology, Utrecht, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Nephrology, Utrecht, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Nephrology, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Corresponding author. University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Cell macroencapsulation devices (CMDs) represent a promising therapeutic approach by combining controlled, off-the-shelf technology with living tissue functionality. Despite their potential, the current knowledge about CMD development and implementation remains fragmented across different applications. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the available evidence on implantable CMDs and establish a comprehensive framework for their development. Our analysis cataloged studies based on device materials and design, cell types, implantation strategies, and evaluation methods. The review revealed that CMD development has largely progressed in application-specific silos, with varying approaches to device characterization, cell selection (from xenogeneic to autologous), and assessment methods. Key evaluation parameters included cell survival and functionality, host tissue response (inflammation, vascularization, and fibrosis), and therapeutic efficacy. While successful implementations exist across multiple applications, the lack of standardized development and evaluation protocols emerges as a significant barrier to cross-application advancement. These findings highlight the need for unified assessment frameworks to accelerate CMD development across therapeutic applications.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352320425001294Cell encapsulationBioencapsulationBiomedical devicesImplantationTherapeutic delivery |
| spellingShingle | Murillo D.L. Bernardi Natascha Rus Robin W.M. Vernooij Marianne C. Verhaar Maarten B. Rookmaaker Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review Regenerative Therapy Cell encapsulation Bioencapsulation Biomedical devices Implantation Therapeutic delivery |
| title | Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review |
| title_full | Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review |
| title_short | Cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research: A systematic review |
| title_sort | cell macroencapsulation devices in contemporary research a systematic review |
| topic | Cell encapsulation Bioencapsulation Biomedical devices Implantation Therapeutic delivery |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352320425001294 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT murillodlbernardi cellmacroencapsulationdevicesincontemporaryresearchasystematicreview AT natascharus cellmacroencapsulationdevicesincontemporaryresearchasystematicreview AT robinwmvernooij cellmacroencapsulationdevicesincontemporaryresearchasystematicreview AT mariannecverhaar cellmacroencapsulationdevicesincontemporaryresearchasystematicreview AT maartenbrookmaaker cellmacroencapsulationdevicesincontemporaryresearchasystematicreview |