Evidence Hub

Better models, better treatment? a systematic review of current three dimensional (3D) in vitro models for implant-associated infections

Brümmer N, Doll-Nikutta K, Schadzek P, Mikolai C, Kampmann A, Wirth D, Hoffmann A, Pott PC et al.

Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Understanding the biology of implant-associated infections is essential in order to provide adequate detection, prevention and therapeutic strategies. Advanced 3D in vitro models offer valuable insights into the complex interactions between cells and bacteria in the presence of implant materials. This review aims to give a comprehensive overview of current 3D in vitro models that mimic implant-associated infections.

Methods: The structured literature search initially identified 258 publications, seven of which fitted the inclusion criteria.

Results: The included 3D models were established either to mimic the in vivo situation (organotypic model) or to investigate future implant materials. In three studies, organotypic models for dental implants were created and one study described an organotypic model containing immune cells. In the remaining three studies, biomaterials for constructing future orthopedic implants were developed and tested. All authors included specific cells and bacteria suitable for the respective implants. The dental implant models used fibroblasts and keratinocytes; the orthopedic implant models used stem cells and fibroblast-like cells; the model containing immune cells incorporated co-cultivation of fibroblasts and THP-1 derived macrophages. For bacterial challenge, most authors used Gram positive bacteria, but three studies employed Gram negative bacterial species. A wide variety of analytical methods of different complexity were applied…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free