Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28105339›Full record

ArticleBiomedical reports2016

Analysis of multiple types of human cells subsequent to bioprinting with electrospraying technology.

Yu Xin, Gang Chai, Ting Zhang, Xiangsheng Wang, Miao Qu, Andy Tan, Melia Bogari, Ming Zhu, Li Lin, Qingxi Hu and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 3D bioprinting using stem cells.Pediatric research · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yu XinDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China; Shanghai Tissue Engineering Key Laboratory, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Gang ChaiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China; Shanghai Tissue Engineering Key Laboratory, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Ting ZhangRapid Manufacturing Engineering Center, School of Mechatronic Engineering and Automation, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, P.R. China.
Xiangsheng WangDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China; Shanghai Tissue Engineering Key Laboratory, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Miao QuClinic for Plastic, Hand and Burns Surgery, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, D-52074 Aachen, Germany.
Andy TanDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Melia BogariDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Ming ZhuDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Li LinDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Qingxi HuRapid Manufacturing Engineering Center, School of Mechatronic Engineering and Automation, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, P.R. China.
Yuanyuan LiuRapid Manufacturing Engineering Center, School of Mechatronic Engineering and Automation, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, P.R. China.
Yan ZhangDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai 9th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China; Shanghai Tissue Engineering Key Laboratory, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, P.R. China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNShanghai University · CNUniversitätsklinikum Aachen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate bioprinting with electrospraying technology using multiple types of human cell suspensions as bio-ink, in order to lay the initial foundations for the application of the bioprinting technology in tissue engineering. In the current study, six types of human cells were selected and cultured, including human fibroblasts, human adipose-derived stem cells (hADSCs), human periodontal ligament cells (HPDLCs), adult human retinal pigment epithelial cells (ARPE-19), human umbilical vascular endothelial cells (HUVECs) and human gastric epithelial cell line (GES-1). Each cell type was divided into two groups, the experimental and control group. All the experimental group cells were electrosprayed using an electrospraying printer (voltage, 15 kV; flow rate, 150 µl/min) and collected in a petri dish placed 15 cm away from the needle (needle diameter, 0.5 mm). Subsequently, cell viability was detected by flow cytometry with a Live/Dead Viability kit. In addition, the cell morphological characteristics were observed with a phase-contrast microscope after 6 h of culturing in order to obtain adherent cells, while cell proliferation was analyzed using a Cell Counting Kit-8 assay. The control groups, without printing, were subjected to the same procedures as the experimental groups. The results of the cell viability and proliferation assays indicated a statistically significant difference after printing between the experiments and control groups only for the hADSCs (P<0.05); by contrast, no significant difference was observed in cell viability and proliferation for the other five cell types (P>0.05). In addition, there were no observable differences between all experimental and the control groups at any examined time point in the terms of cell morphological characteristics. In conclusion, bioprinting based on electrospraying technology demonstrated no distinct negative effect on cell vitality, proliferation and morphology in the present study, and thus the application of this novel technology to cell printing may provide a promising method in tissue engineering.

Indexed as

bioprintingelectrospraying technologyhuman cellsmulticellular analysistissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID28105339
PMCPMC5228355
OpenAlexW2533613164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.