ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2020
3D printing of an integrated triphasic MBG-alginate scaffold with enhanced interface bonding for hard tissue applications.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- A biomimetic 3D printed gradient tri-layered scaffold stimulating osteochondral differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells for mandibular condyle regeneration.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Bioadhesive-Integrated 3D-Printed Multilayer Scaffolds Secure a Mechanically-Stable Osteoimmune Niche for Enhanced Bone Augmentation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- 3D printed osteochondral scaffolds: design strategies, present applications and future perspectives.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Biomolecules-Loading of 3D-Printed Alginate-Based Scaffolds for Cartilage Tissue Engineering Applications: A Review on Current Status and Future Prospective.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2024Review
- Polysaccharide-based biomaterials in a journey from 3D to 4D printing.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Review
- A 3D-Printed Biomaterial Scaffold Reinforced with Inorganic Fillers for Bone Tissue Engineering: In Vitro Assessment and In Vivo Animal Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Is 3D Printing Promising for Osteochondral Tissue Regeneration?ACS applied bio materials · 2023Review
- 3D-printed gradient scaffolds for osteochondral defects: Current status and perspectives.International journal of bioprinting · 2023Review
- Improved 3D Printing and Cell Biology Characterization of Inorganic-Filler Containing Alginate-Based Composites for Bone Regeneration: Particle Shape and Effective Surface Area Are the Dominant Factors for Printing Performance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Homogeneous and Reproducible Mixing of Highly Viscous Biomaterial Inks and Cell Suspensions to Create Bioinks.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- 3D Printed Multiphasic Scaffolds for Osteochondral Repair: Challenges and Opportunities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Tailorable Zinc-Substituted Mesoporous Bioactive Glass/Alginate-Methylcellulose Composite Bioinks.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Scaffold-Based Tissue Engineering Strategies for Osteochondral Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Composite Bioinks With Mesoporous Bioactive Glasses-A Critical Evaluation of Results Obtained byFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Osteochondral defects affect both of cartilage and subchondral areas, thus it poses a significant challenge to simultaneously regenerate two parts in orthopedics. Tissue engineering strategy is currently regarded as the most promising way to repair osteochondral defects. This study focuses on developing a multilayered scaffold with enhanced interface bonding through 3D printing. One-shot printing process enables control over material composition, pore structure, and size in each region of the scaffold, while realizes seamlessly integrated construct as well. The scaffold was designed to be triphasic: a porous bone layer composed of alginate sodium (SA) and mesoporous bioactive glasses (MBG), an intermediate dense layer also composed of SA and MBG and a cartilaginous layer composed of SA. The mechanical strength including the interface adhesion strength between layers were characterized. The results indicated that SA crosslinking after 3D printing anchored different materials together and integrated all regions. Additional scaffold soaking in simulated body fluid (SBF) and cell culture medium induced apatite deposition and had weakened the compressive and tensile strengths, while no layer dislocation or delamination occurred.
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.