Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30709394›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2019

Medical-grade polycaprolactone scaffolds made by melt electrospinning writing for oral bone regeneration - a pilot study in vitro.

A Fuchs, A Youssef, A Seher, G Hochleitner, P D Dalton, S Hartmann, R C Brands, U D A Müller-Richter, C Linz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Polymers for Melt Electrowriting.Advanced healthcare materials · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Polycaprolactone as biomaterial for bone scaffolds: Review of literature.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A FuchsDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany. fuchs_a2@ukw.de.
A YoussefDepartment for Functional Materials in Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
A SeherDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
G HochleitnerDepartment for Functional Materials in Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
P D DaltonDepartment for Functional Materials in Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
S HartmannDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
R C BrandsDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
U D A Müller-RichterDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
C LinzDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Pleicherwall 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Universitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe spectrum of indications for the use of membranes and scaffolds in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery includes, amongst others, guided bone regeneration (GBR). Currently available membrane systems face certain disadvantages such as difficult clinical handling, inconsistent degradation, undirected cell growth and a lack of stability that often complicate their application. Therefore, new membranes which can overcome these issues are of great interest in this field.

methodsIn this pilot study, we investigated polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds intended to enhance oral wound healing by means of melt electrospinning writing (MEW), which allowed for three-dimensional (3D) printing of micron scale fibers and very exact fiber placement. A singular set of box-shaped scaffolds of different sizes consisting of medical-grade PCL was examined and the scaffolds' morphology was evaluated via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Each prototype sample with box sizes of 225 μm, 300 μm, 375 μm, 450 μm and 500 μm was assessed for cytotoxicity and cell growth by seeding each scaffold with human osteoblast-like cell line MG63.

resultsAll scaffolds demonstrated good cytocompatibility according to cell viability, protein concentration, and cell number. SEM analysis revealed an exact fiber placement of the MEW scaffolds and the growth of viable MG63 cells on them. For the examined box-shaped scaffolds with pore sizes between 225 μm and 500 μm, a preferred box size for initial osteoblast attachment could not be found.

conclusionsThese well-defined 3D scaffolds consisting of medical-grade materials optimized for cell attachment and cell growth hold the key to a promising new approach in GBR in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Indexed as

Bone RegenerationPolyestersTissue ScaffoldsCell ProliferationHumansPilot ProjectsWritingpolycaprolactonePolyestersGuided bone regenerationMelt electrospinning writingPolycaprolactoneScaffold

Identifiers

PMID30709394
PMCPMC6359770
OpenAlexW2942089906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.