ArticleBiomicrofluidics2015
Osteocyte culture in microfluidic devices.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Harnessing Advances in Bone Tissue Engineering for Design of Bone-on-Chip Systems.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- In vitro development and optimization of cell-laden injectable bioprinted gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) microgels mineralized on the nanoscale.Biomaterials advances · 2024Article
- Experimental measurements and CFD modelling of hydroxyapatite scaffolds in perfusion bioreactors for bone regeneration.Regenerative biomaterials · 2023Article
- Perfused Platforms to Mimic Bone Microenvironment at the Macro/Milli/Microscale: Pros and Cons.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
- Anticancer efficacies of arsenic disulfide through apoptosis induction, cell cycle arrest, and pro-survival signal inhibition in human breast cancer cells.American journal of cancer research · 2018Article
- A multiscale fluidic device for the study of dendrite-mediated cell to cell communication.Biomedical microdevices · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a microfluidic device (poly-dimethylsiloxane micro channels bonded with glass slides) enabling culture of MLO-Y4 osteocyte like cells. In this study, on-chip collagen coating, cell seeding and culture, as well as staining were demonstrated in a tubing-free manner where gravity was used as the driving force for liquid transportation. MLO-Y4 cells were cultured in microfluidic channels with and without collagen coating where cellular images in a time sequence were taken and analyzed, confirming the positive effect of collagen coating on phenotype maintaining of MLO-Y4 cells. The proliferating cell nuclear antigen based proliferation assay was used to study cellular proliferation, revealing a higher proliferation rate of MLO-Y4 cells seeded in microfluidic channels without collagen coating compared to the substrates coated with collagen. Furthermore, the effects of channel dimensions (variations in width and height) on the viability of MLO-Y4 cells were explored based on the Calcein-AM and propidium iodide based live/dead assay and the Hoechst 33258 based apoptosis assay, locating the correlation between the decrease in channel width or height and the decrease in cell viability. As a platform technology, this microfluidic device may function as a new cell culture model enabling studies of osteocytes.
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.