ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Freeze-FRESH: A 3D Printing Technique to Produce Biomaterial Scaffolds with Hierarchical Porosity.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Freeze-Dried CS/PVP/PVA Composite Scaffolds Doped with Curcumin and SiOInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Data-driven multiscale design of composite biomaterials: Integrating experiments, imaging, and computational modeling for biomedical engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Unconventional bioprinting modalities for advanced tissue biofabrication.Biomaterials · 2026Review
- Dissecting the Interplay Mechanism among Process Parameters toward the Biofabrication of High-Quality Shapes in Embedded Bioprinting.Advanced functional materials · 2024Article
- Advances in 3D bioprinting for urethral tissue reconstruction.Trends in biotechnology · 2024Review
- Embedded 3D bioprinting - An emerging strategy to fabricate biomimetic & large vascularized tissue constructs.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- Investigation of the 3D Printing Process Utilizing a Heterophase System.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Rheology as a Tool for Fine-Tuning the Properties of Printable Bioinspired Gels.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The application of 3D bioprinting in urological diseases.Materials today. Bio · 2022Review
- Optimization of Freeze-FRESH Methodology for 3D Printing of Microporous Collagen Constructs.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2022Article
- Article
- Emergence of FRESH 3D printing as a platform for advanced tissue biofabrication.APL bioengineering · 2021Article
- Cryogenic 3D printing of dual-delivery scaffolds for improved bone regeneration with enhanced vascularization.Bioactive materials · 2021Article
- Freeform 3D printing of soft matters: recent advances in technology for biomedical engineering.Biomedical engineering letters · 2020Review
- Printability and Shape Fidelity of Bioinks in 3D Bioprinting.Chemical reviews · 2020Review
- Three-Dimensional Printing Constructs Based on the Chitosan for Tissue Regeneration: State of the Art, Developing Directions and Prospect Trends.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tissues are organized in hierarchical structures comprised of nanoscale, microscale, and macroscale features. Incorporating hierarchical structures into biomaterial scaffolds may enable better resemblance of native tissue structures and improve cell interaction, but it is challenging to produce such scaffolds using a single conventional scaffold production technique. We developed the Freeze-FRESH (FF) technique that combines FRESH 3D printing (3DP) and freeze-casting to produce 3D printed scaffolds with microscale pores in the struts. FF scaffolds were produced by extrusion 3DP using a support bath at room temperature, followed by freezing and lyophilization, then the FF scaffolds were recovered from the bath and crosslinked. The FF scaffolds had a hierarchical pore structure from the combination of microscale pores throughout the scaffold struts and macroscale pores in the printed design, while control scaffolds had only macroscale pores. FF scaffolds frozen at -20 °C and -80 °C had similar pore sizes, due to freezing in the support bath. The -20 °C and -80 °C FF scaffolds had porous struts with 63.55% ± 2.59% and 56.72% ± 13.17% strut porosity, respectively, while control scaffolds had a strut porosity of 3.15% ± 2.20%. The -20 °C and -80 °C FF scaffolds were softer than control scaffolds: they had pore wall stiffness of 0.17 ± 0.06 MPa and 0.23 ± 0.05 MPa, respectively, compared to 1.31 ± 0.39 MPa for the control. The FF scaffolds had increased resilience in bending compared with control. FF scaffolds supported MDA-MB-231 cell growth and had significantly greater cell numbers than control scaffolds. Cells formed clusters on the porous struts of FF scaffolds and had similar morphologies as the freeze cast scaffolds. The FF technique successfully introduced microscale porosity into the 3DP scaffold struts to produce hierarchical pore structures that enhanced MDA-MB-231 growth.
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.