ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Effect of Electrospun Fiber Mat Thickness and Support Method on Cell Morphology.
Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-Step Extrusion Printing of Microgrooved Annulus Fibrosus Scaffolds via Patterned Nozzles.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- 3D-Printed Microfluidic-Based Cell Culture System With Analysis to Investigate Macrophage Activation.Electrophoresis · 2025Article
- Electrospun Poly(ethylene Terephthalate)/Silk Fibroin Composite for Filtration Application.Polymers · 2021Article
- A State-of-the-Art of Functional Scaffolds for 3D Nervous Tissue Regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Effects of Fiber Density and Strain Rate on the Mechanical Properties of Electrospun Polycaprolactone Nanofiber Mats.Frontiers in chemistry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Electrospun fiber mats (EFMs) are highly versatile biomaterials used in a myriad of biomedical applications. Whereas some facets of EFMs are well studied and can be highly tuned (e.g., pore size, fiber diameter, etc.), other features are under characterized. For example, although substrate mechanics have been explored by several groups, most studies rely on Young's modulus alone as a characterization variable. The influence of fiber mat thickness and the effect of supports are variables that are often not considered when evaluating cell-mechanical response. To assay the role of these features in EFM scaffold design and to improve understanding of scaffold mechanical properties, we designed EFM scaffolds with varying thickness (50-200 µm) and supporting methodologies. EFM scaffolds were comprised of polycaprolactone and were either electrospun directly onto a support, suspended across an annulus (3 or 10 mm inner diameter), or "tension-released" and then suspended across an annulus. Then, single cell spreading (i.e., Feret diameter) was measured in the presence of these different features. Cells were sensitive to EFM thickness and suspended gap diameter. Overall, cell spreading was greatest for 50 µm thick EFMs suspended over a 3 mm gap, which was the smallest thickness and gap investigated. These results are counterintuitive to conventional understanding in mechanobiology, which suggests that stiffer materials, such as thicker, supported EFMs, should elicit greater cell polarization. Additional experiments with 50 µm thick EFMs on polystyrene and polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) supports demonstrated that cells can "feel" the support underlying the EFM if it is rigid, similar to previous results in hydrogels. These results also suggest that EFM curvature may play a role in cell response, separate from Young's modulus, possibly because of internal tension generated. These parameters are not often considered in EFM design and could improve scaffold performance and ultimately patient outcomes.
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.