Table 1 Fabrication method, benefits and limitations of different scaffolds for cell delivery

Hydrogel scaffold

Physical/chemical cross-linking

Highly biocompatible and biodegradable

Natural hydrogels do not have strong mechanical strength, require combining with synthetic ones. Batch-to-batch variation

Polymerization grafting

Low cytotoxicity

Radiation cross-linking

Similarity to physiological environment in human tissue

Sponge scaffold

Freeze-drying

The uniform interconnected pore network provides suitable microenvironment for cell attachment, migration, and nutrient transition

The surface and pore structures require to be adjusted based on cell types and host tissue

Gas foaming

The swelling capacity of scaffold influence cell behaviour and allow absorption of the exudate in the wound

The fabrication procedure is time consuming

Porogen leaching

Fibrous scaffold

Electrospinning

Mimic the micro- or nano- structure of human tissue

Small pore size of fibrous scaffolds may hamper cellular migration, restricting tissue ingrowth

Fibre bonding

High surface-area-to-volume ratio is suitable for cell adhesion, proliferation, migration, and differentiation

Needle punch

Flexible mechanical properties

Decellularized graft

Physical methods (freezing, force etc.)

Retained native ECM component and structure are favourable for cell attachment, migration, and differentiation

Complete decellularization is essential to avoid immune response

Chemical methods (acid, Triton etc.) Enzymatic methods (Trypsin, pepsin etc.)

Higher mechanical strength