ArticleBiosensors2019
A Novel Toolkit for Characterizing the Mechanical and Electrical Properties of Engineered Neural Tissues.
Article in Biosensors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward a New Generation of Bio-Scaffolds for Neural Tissue Engineering: Challenges and Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- 3D bioprinting patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cell models of Alzheimer's disease using a smart bioink.Bioelectronic medicine · 2023Article
- Protocol for 3D Bioprinting Mesenchymal Stem Cell-derived Neural Tissues Using a Fibrin-based Bioink.Bio-protocol · 2023Article
- Study on the Mechanism of Action of Paclitaxel-Loaded Polylactic-co-glycolic Acid Nanoparticles in Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma Cells.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- 3D Bioprinting Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Neural Tissues Using a Fibrin-Based Bioink.Biomolecules · 2021Article
- Application of fibrin-based hydrogels for nerve protection and regeneration after spinal cord injury.Journal of biological engineering · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We have designed and validated a set of robust and non-toxic protocols for directly evaluating the properties of engineered neural tissue. These protocols characterize the mechanical properties of engineered neural tissues and measure their electrophysical activity. The protocols obtain elastic moduli of very soft fibrin hydrogel scaffolds and voltage readings from motor neuron cultures. Neurons require soft substrates to differentiate and mature, however measuring the elastic moduli of soft substrates remains difficult to accurately measure using standard protocols such as atomic force microscopy or shear rheology. Here we validate a direct method for acquiring elastic modulus of fibrin using a modified Hertz model for thin films. In this method, spherical indenters are positioned on top of the fibrin samples, generating an indentation depth that is then correlated with elastic modulus. Neurons function by transmitting electrical signals to one another and being able to assess the development of electrical signaling serves is an important verification step when engineering neural tissues. We then validated a protocol wherein the electrical activity of motor neural cultures is measured directly by a voltage sensitive dye and a microplate reader without causing damage to the cells. These protocols provide a non-destructive method for characterizing the mechanical and electrical properties of living spinal cord tissues using novel biosensing methods.
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.