Global Tissue Engineering Trends: A Scientometric and Evolutive Study

Bibliometric methods or “analysis” are now firmly established as scientific specialties and are an integral part of research evaluation methodology especially within the scientific and applied fields. The methods are used increasingly when studying various aspects of science and also in the way institutions and universities are ranked worldwide. A sufficient number of studies have been completed, and with the resulting literature, it is now possible to analyse the bibliometric method by using its own methodology. The bibliometric literature in this study, which was extracted from Web of Science, is divided into two parts using a method comparable to the method of Jonkers et al. (Characteristics of bibliometrics articles in library and information sciences (LIS) and other journals, pp. 449–551, 2012: The publications either lie within the Information and Library Science (ILS) category or within the non-ILS category which includes more applied, “subject” based studies. The impact in the different groupings is judged by means of citation analysis using normalized data and an almost linear increase can be observed from 1994 onwards in the non-ILS category. The implication for the dissemination and use of the bibliometric methods in the different contexts is discussed. A keyword analysis identifies the most popular subjects covered by bibliometric analysis, and multidisciplinary articles are shown to have the highest impact. A noticeable shift is observed in those countries which contribute to the pool of bibliometric analysis, as well as a self-perpetuating effect in giving and taking references.

Bibliometric studies are increasingly being used for research assessment. Bibliometric indicators are strongly methodology-dependent but for all of them, various types of data normalization are an indispensable requirement. Bibliometric studies have many pitfalls; technical skill, critical sense and a precise knowledge about the examined scientific domain are required to carry out and interpret bibliometric investigations correctly.

Background: Over recent decades, scientists and surgeons have collaborated to develop various bioengineered and synthetic products as an alternative to skin grafts. Despite the numerous articles and reviews written about dermal skin substitutes, there is no general consensus. Methods: This article reviews dermal skin scaffolds used in clinical applications and experimental settings. For scaffold evaluation, we focused on clinical and/or histological results, and conclusions are listed. Explanations for general trends were sought based on existing knowledge about tissue engineering principles and wound healing mechanisms. Results: Decellularized dermis seems to remain the best option with no other acellular scaffold being clinically proven to gain better results yet. In general, chemically cross-linked products were seen to be less effective in skin tissue engineering. Biocompatibility could be enhanced by preseeding substitutes with fibroblasts to allow some natural scaffold remodeling before product application. Conclusions: Skin substitutes are a useful tool in plastic and reconstructive surgery practices as an alternative to skin grafts. In the choice of substitute, the general plastic surgery principle of replacing like tissue with like tissue seems to be still standing, and products most resembling the natural dermal extracellular matrix should be preferred.