ArticleBiomicrofluidics2015
On-chip assay of the effect of topographical microenvironment on cell growth and cell-cell interactions during wound healing.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Potential of COMaterials today. Bio · 2021Article
- Bioengineered Platforms for Chronic Wound Infection Studies: How Can We Make Them More Human-Relevant?Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Review
- 3D Microstructure Inhibits Mesenchymal Stem Cells Homing to the Site of Liver Cancer Cells on a Microchip.Genes · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wound healing is an essential physiological process for tissue homeostasis, involving multiple types of cells, extracellular matrices, and growth factor/chemokine interactions. Many in vitro studies have investigated the interactions between cues mentioned above; however, most of them only focused on a single factor. In the present study, we design a wound healing device to recapitulate in vivo complex microenvironments and heterogeneous cell situations to investigate how three types of physiologically related cells interact with their microenvironments around and with each other during a wound healing process. Briefly, a microfluidic device with a micropillar substrate, where diameter and interspacing can be tuned to mimic the topographical features of the 3D extracellular matrix, was designed to perform positional cell loading on the micropillar substrate, co-culture of three types of physiologically related cells, keratinocytes, dermal fibroblasts, and human umbilical vein endothelial cells, as well as an investigation of their interactions during wound healing. The result showed that cell attachment, morphology, cytoskeleton distribution, and nucleus shape were strongly affected by the micropillars, and these cells showed collaborative response to heal the wound. Taken together, these findings highlight the dynamic relationship between cells and their microenvironments. Also, this reproducible device may facilitate the in vitro investigation of numerous physiological and pathological processes such as cancer metastasis, angiogenesis, and tissue engineering.
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.