Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28280669›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2017

In Vivo Chondrogenesis in 3D Bioprinted Human Cell-laden Hydrogel Constructs.

Thomas Möller, Matteo Amoroso, Daniel Hägg, Camilla Brantsing, Nicole Rotter, Peter Apelgren, Anders Lindahl, Lars Kölby, Paul Gatenholm

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Extracellular-Matrix-Mimetic Hydrogels by Using Nanomaterials.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. 3D Culture of MSCs for Clinical Application.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. 3D Bioprinting in Otolaryngology: A Review.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Thomas Möller3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Matteo Amoroso3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Daniel Hägg3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Camilla Brantsing3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Nicole Rotter3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Peter Apelgren3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Anders Lindahl3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Lars Kölby3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.
Paul Gatenholm3D Bioprinting Centre, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Plastic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; and University Medical Center Ulm, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Frauensteige 12, 89075 Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting technology allows creation of 3D constructs in a layer-by-layer fashion utilizing biologically relevant materials such as biopolymers and cells. The aim of this study is to investigate the use of 3D bioprinting in a clinically relevant setting to evaluate the potential of this technique for in vivo chondrogenesis.

methodsThirty-six nude mice (Balb-C, female) received a 5- × 5- × 1-mm piece of bioprinted cell-laden nanofibrillated cellulose/alginate construct in a subcutaneous pocket. Four groups of printed constructs were used: (1) human (male) nasal chondrocytes (hNCs), (2) human (female) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hBMSCs), (3) coculture of hNCs and hBMSCs in a 20/80 ratio, and (4) Cell-free scaffolds (blank). After 14, 30, and 60 days, the scaffolds were harvested for histological, immunohistochemical, and mechanical analysis.

resultsThe constructs had good mechanical properties and keep their structural integrity after 60 days of implantation. For both the hNC constructs and the cocultured constructs, a gradual increase of glycosaminoglycan production and hNC proliferation was observed. However, the cocultured group showed a more pronounced cell proliferation and enhanced deposition of human collagen II demonstrated by immunohistochemical analysis.

conclusionsIn vivo chondrogenesis in a 3D bioprinted human cell-laden hydrogel construct has been demonstrated. The trophic role of the hBMSCs in stimulating hNC proliferation and matrix deposition in the coculture group suggests the potential of 3D bioprinting of human cartilage for future application in reconstructive surgery.

Identifiers

PMID28280669
PMCPMC5340484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.