Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33184580›Full record

ArticleCellular and molecular bioengineering2020

Scaffold Architecture and Matrix Strain Modulate Mesenchymal Cell and Microvascular Growth and Development in a Time Dependent Manner.

Gennifer Chiou, Elysa Jui, Allison C Rhea, Aparna Gorthi, Solaleh Miar, Francisca M Acosta, Cynthia Perez, Yasir Suhail, Kshitiz, Yidong Chen and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cellular and molecular bioengineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Gennifer ChiouDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Elysa JuiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Allison C RheaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Aparna GorthiGreehey Children's Cancer Research Institute, University of Texas Health at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229 USA.
Solaleh MiarDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Francisca M AcostaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Cynthia PerezDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Yasir SuhailDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030 USA.
KshitizDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030 USA.
Yidong ChenGreehey Children's Cancer Research Institute, University of Texas Health at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229 USA.
Joo L OngDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Rena BiziosDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Christopher RathboneDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.
Teja GudaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3218-2916
The University of Texas at San Antonio · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUConn Health · USYale Cancer Center · US

Funding

UTSA RISE Research Training ProgramR25GM060655 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO · PI BAREA-RODRIGUEZ, EDWIN J · 2000 to 2022
$21.6M
Institute for Integration of Medicine & Science: A Partnership to Improve HealthUL1TR002645 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI CLARK, ROBERT A, HARGREAVES, KENNETH M · 2018 to 2022
$20.4M
NRSA Training Core (TL1)TL1TR002647 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI CHUN, YONG-HEE PATRICIA, FREI, CHRISTOPHER R. · 2018 to 2022
$1.8M
Elucidating Skeletal Muscle Satellite Cell:Microvessel Interactions in Diabetic MuscleSC1DK122578 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO · PI RATHBONE, CHRISTOPHER RONALD · 2019 to 2022
$1.5M
High Throughput DNA Sequencer: Illumina HiSeq 3000 SequencerS10OD021805 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI LAI, ZHAO · 2016 to 2016
$600k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002647NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002645NIDDK NIH HHS SC1 DK122578NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM060655NIH HHS S10 OD021805
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVolumetric tissue-engineered constructs are limited in development due to the dependence on well-formed vascular networks. Scaffold pore size and the mechanical properties of the matrix dictates cell attachment, proliferation and successive tissue morphogenesis. We hypothesize scaffold pore architecture also controls stromal-vessel interactions during morphogenesis.

methodsThe interaction between mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) seeded on hydroxyapatite scaffolds of 450, 340, and 250 μm pores and microvascular fragments (MVFs) seeded within 20 mg/mL fibrin hydrogels that were cast into the cell-seeded scaffolds, was assessed

resultsLectin staining of decalcified scaffolds showed continued vessel growth, branching and network formation at 14 days. The fibrin gel provides no resistance to spread-out capillary networks formation, with greater vessel loops within the 450 μm pores and vessels bridging across 250 μm pores. Vessel growth in the scaffolds was observed to be stimulated by hypoxia and successive angiogenic signaling. Fibrin gels showed linear fold increase in VEGF expression and no change in BMP2. Within scaffolds, there was multiple fold increase in VEGF between days 7 and 14 and early multiple fold increases in BMP2 between days 3 and 7, relative to fibrin. There was evidence of yap/taz based hippo signaling and mechanotransduction in the scaffold groups. The vessel growth models determined by computational modeling matched the trends observed experimentally.

conclusionThe differing nature of hypoxia signaling between scaffold systems and mechano-transduction sensing matrix mechanics were primarily responsible for differences in osteogenic cell and microvessel growth. The computational model implicated scaffold architecture in dictating branching morphology and strain in the hydrogel within pores in dictating vessel lengths.

Indexed as

BoneCapillariesScaffoldStromaVascularization

Identifiers

PMID33184580
PMCPMC7596170
OpenAlexW3068917911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.