ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2011
Development and characterization of reinforced poly(L-lactide) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Magnesium Oxide (MgO) Shapes on In Vitro and In Vivo Degradation Behaviors of PLA/MgO Composites in Long Term.Polymers · 2020Article
- Biomimetic Designer Scaffolds Made of D,L-Lactide-Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2019Review
- Injectable silk foams for soft tissue regeneration.Advanced healthcare materials · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel reinforced poly(L-lactic acid) (PLLA) scaffolds such as solid shell, porous shell, one beam and two beam reinforced scaffolds were developed to improve the mechanical properties of a standard PLLA scaffold. Experimental results clearly indicated that the compressive mechanical properties such as the strength and the modulus are effectively improved by introducing the reinforcement structures. A linear elastic model consisting of three phases, that is, the reinforcement, the porous matrix and the boundary layer was also introduced in order to predict the compressive moduli of the reinforced scaffolds. The comparative study clearly showed that the simple theoretical model can reasonably predict the moduli of the scaffolds with three phase structures. The failure mechanism of the solid shell and the porous shell reinforced scaffolds under compression were found to be buckling of the solid shell and localized buckling of the struts constructing the pores in the porous shell, respectively. For the beam reinforced scaffolds, on the contrary, the primary failure mechanism was understood to be micro-cracking within the beams and the subsequent formation of the main-crack due to the coalescence of the micro-racks. The biological study was exhibited that osteoblast-like cells, MC3T3-E1, were well adhered and proliferated on the surfaces of the scaffolds after 12 days culturing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.