ArticleScientific reports2015
Optimizing cell viability in droplet-based cell deposition.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 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
40 citing papers in PubMed.
- Additive Manufacturing of Biomaterials: Integrated Translational Ecosystems, Process-Structure-Property Interactions and Emerging Paradigms for Next-Generation Biomedical Engineering.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Functional Nano-to-Microstructures by Jet Printing and Direct Ink Writing.Chemical reviews · 2026Review
- Unconventional bioprinting modalities for advanced tissue biofabrication.Biomaterials · 2026Review
- A Novel Sprayable Fibrinogen/Glycosaminoglycans/Collagen-Based Bioink for Skin Wound Healing Applied by a Handheld Dual-Head Airbrush.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- An evaluation of spraying as a delivery method for human mesenchymal stem cells suspended in low-methyl pectin solutions.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Article
- Understanding the cellular dynamics, engineering perspectives and translation prospects in bioprinting epithelial tissues.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Droplet-based bioprinting.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2025Article
- Microfluidic Biochips for Single-Cell Isolation and Single-Cell Analysis of Multiomics and Exosomes.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- High-Speed Fluorescence Imaging Corroborates Biological Data on the Influence of Different Nozzle Types on Cell Spray Viability and Formation.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Biochemical Characteristics and Potential Biomedical Applications of Hydrolyzed Carrageenans.Marine drugs · 2023Article
- Scalable fabrication, compartmentalization and applications of living microtissues.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- Research progress and challenges of bioprinting in wound dressing and healing: Bibliometrics-based analysis and perspectives.International journal of bioprinting · 2023Review
- A review on cell damage, viability, and functionality during 3D bioprinting.Military Medical Research · 2022Review
- Development and Application of Three-Dimensional Bioprinting Scaffold in the Repair of Spinal Cord Injury.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2022Review
- Methodologies of Autologous Skin Cell Spray Graft.Cureus · 2022Review
- Advances in spray products for skin regeneration.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Vision-Based Performance Analysis of an Active Microfluidic Droplet Generation System Using Droplet Images.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Printability and Cell Viability in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting from Experimental, Computational, and Machine Learning Views.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Review
- A Bioprinted Heart-on-a-Chip with Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes for Drug Evaluation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Controlling Droplet Impact Velocity and Droplet Volume: Key Factors to Achieving High Cell Viability in Sub-Nanoliter Droplet-based Bioprinting.International journal of bioprinting · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biofabrication commonly involves the use of liquid droplets to transport cells to the printed structure. However, the viability of the cells after impact is poorly controlled and understood, hampering applications including cell spraying, inkjet bioprinting, and laser-assisted cell transfer. Here, we present an analytical model describing the cell viability after impact as a function of the cell-surrounding droplet characteristics. The model connects (1) the cell survival as a function of cell membrane elongation, (2) the membrane elongation as a function of the cell-containing droplet size and velocity, and (3) the substrate properties. The model is validated by cell viability measurements in cell spraying, which is a method for biofabrication and used for the treatment of burn wounds. The results allow for rational optimization of any droplet-based cell deposition technology, and we include practical suggestions to improve the cell viability in cell spraying.
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.