Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31890268›Full record

ArticleBiomaterials research2019

Increased pore size of scaffolds improves coating efficiency with sulfated hyaluronan and mineralization capacity of osteoblasts.

Jan Krieghoff, Ann-Kristin Picke, Juliane Salbach-Hirsch, Sandra Rother, Christiane Heinemann, Ricardo Bernhardt, Christian Kascholke, Stephanie Möller, Martina Rauner, Matthias Schnabelrauch and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomaterials research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. RefinedFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Jan Krieghoff *1Institute for Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ann-Kristin Picke *2Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolic Bone Diseases, Department of Medicine III, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Juliane Salbach-Hirsch2Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolic Bone Diseases, Department of Medicine III, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Sandra Rother4Institute of Materials Science, Max Bergmann Center of Biomaterials, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Christiane Heinemann4Institute of Materials Science, Max Bergmann Center of Biomaterials, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Ricardo Bernhardt4Institute of Materials Science, Max Bergmann Center of Biomaterials, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Christian Kascholke1Institute for Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Stephanie Möller7Biomaterials Department, INNOVENT e.V, Jena, Germany.
Martina Rauner2Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolic Bone Diseases, Department of Medicine III, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Matthias Schnabelrauch7Biomaterials Department, INNOVENT e.V, Jena, Germany.
Vera Hintze4Institute of Materials Science, Max Bergmann Center of Biomaterials, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Dieter Scharnweber4Institute of Materials Science, Max Bergmann Center of Biomaterials, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Michaela Schulz-Siegmund1Institute for Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael C Hacker1Institute for Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Lorenz C Hofbauer *2Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolic Bone Diseases, Department of Medicine III, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307 Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8691-8423
Christine Hofbauer *9Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery Center, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Leipzig University · DEMax Bergmann Zentrum für Biomaterialien · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DEInnovent · DEBerlin-Brandenburger Centrum für Regenerative Therapien · DEUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelayed bone regeneration of fractures in osteoporosis patients or of critical-size bone defects after tumor resection are a major medical and socio-economic challenge. Therefore, the development of more effective and osteoinductive biomaterials is crucial.

methodsWe examined the osteogenic potential of macroporous scaffolds with varying pore sizes after biofunctionalization with a collagen/high-sulfated hyaluronan (sHA3) coating in vitro

resultsWe succeeded in generating scaffolds that feature a significantly higher average pore size and a broader distribution of individual pore sizes (HiPo) by modifying composition and relative amount of lipid particles, macromer concentration and temperature for cross-polymerization during scaffold fabrication. Overall porosity was retained, while the scaffolds showed a 25% decrease in compressive modulus compared to the initial TriLA scaffolds with a lower pore size (LoPo). These HiPo scaffolds were more readily coated as shown by higher amounts of immobilized collagen (+ 44%) and sHA3 (+ 25%) compared to LoPo scaffolds. In vitro, culture of hMSCs on collagen and/or sHA3-coated HiPo scaffolds demonstrated unaltered cell viability. Furthermore, the production of ALP, an early marker of osteogenesis (+ 3-fold), and formation of new bone matrix (+ 2.5-fold) was enhanced by the functionalization with sHA3 of both scaffold types. Nevertheless, effects were more pronounced on HiPo scaffolds about 112%.

conclusionIn summary, we showed that the improvement of scaffold pore sizes enhanced the coating efficiency with collagen and sHA3, which had a significant positive effect on bone formation markers, underlining the promise of using this material approach for in vivo studies.

Indexed as

BiomaterialMacroporous scaffoldMineralizationOsteoblast differentiationPoly(lactic acid)Sulfated glycosaminoglycan

Identifiers

PMID31890268
PMCPMC6921484
OpenAlexW2996312969

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.