ArticleTissue engineering. Part A2013
Cells behave distinctly within sponges and hydrogels due to differences of internal structure.
Article in Tissue engineering. Part A, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of external forces in the mechanobiology of stem and differentiated chondrogenic cells embedded in a tissue-engineered construct for cartilage repair.Journal of biomedical science · 2026Review
- Charting a quarter-century of commercial cartilage regeneration products.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Review
- Delivery and Transcriptome Assessment of an In Vitro Three-Dimensional Proximal Tubule Model Established by Human Kidney 2 Cells in Clinical Gelatin Sponges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Engineered dual affinity protein fragments to bind collagen and capture growth factors.Materials today. Bio · 2023Article
- Chondrocytes In Vitro Systems Allowing Study of OA.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Key considerations on the development of biodegradable biomaterials for clinical translation of medical devices: With cartilage repair products as an example.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Collagen type II: From biosynthesis to advanced biomaterials for cartilage engineering.Biomaterials and biosystems · 2021Review
- Articular cartilage and osteochondral tissue engineering techniques: Recent advances and challenges.Bioactive materials · 2021Review
- Mechanotransducive Biomimetic Systems for Chondrogenic Differentiation In Vitro.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Bioprinting Via a Dual-Gel Bioink Based on Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) and Solubilized Extracellular Matrix towards Cartilage Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Collagen Scaffolds in Cartilage Tissue Engineering and Relevant Approaches for Future Development.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2018Review
- Enhanced articular cartilage by human mesenchymal stem cells in enzymatically mediated transiently RGDS-functionalized collagen-mimetic hydrogels.Acta biomaterialia · 2017Article
- Single-step laser-based fabrication and patterning of cell-encapsulated alginate microbeads.Biofabrication · 2013Article
- In vitro maturation and in vivo stability of bioprinted human nasal cartilage.Journal of tissue engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different forms of biomaterials, including microspheres, sponges, hydrogels, and nanofibers, have been broadly used in cartilage regeneration; however, effects of internal structures of the biomaterials on cells and chondrogenesis remain largely unexplored. We hypothesized that different internal structures of sponges and hydrogels led to phenotypic disparity of the cells and may lead to disparate chondrogenesis. In the current study, the chondrocytes in sponges and hydrogels of chitosan were compared with regard to cell distribution, morphology, gene expression, and production of extracellular matrix. The chondrocytes clustered or attached to the materials with spindle morphologies in the sponges, while they distributed evenly with spherical morphologies in the hydrogels. The chondrocytes proliferated faster with elevated gene expression of collagen type I and down-regulated gene expression of aggracan in sponges, when compared with those in the hydrogels. However, there was no significant difference of the expression of collagen type II between these two scaffolds. Excretion of both glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and collagen type II increased with time in vitro, but there was no significant difference between the sponges and the hydrogels. There was no significant difference in secretion of GAG and collagen type II in the two scaffolds, while the levels of collagen type I and collagen type X were much higher in sponges compared with those in hydrogels during an in vivo study. Though the chondrocytes displayed different phenotypes in the sponges and hydrogels, they led to comparable chondrogenesis. An optimized design of the biomaterials could further improve chondrogenesis through enhancing functionalities of the chondrocytes.
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.