ArticleIranian biomedical journal2021
Increased Osteogenic Potential of Pre-Osteoblasts on Three-Dimensional Printed Scaffolds Compared to Porous Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.
Article in Iranian biomedical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of cell culture parameters on oxygen diffusion and cell distribution in 3D-porous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: finite element modeling and experimental verification.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Impression of Biomaterials for Alveolar Graft: Scoping Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Gradient 3D Printed PLA Scaffolds on Biomedical Titanium: Mechanical Evaluation and Biocompatibility.Polymers · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: One of the main challenges with conventional scaffold fabrication methods is the inability to control scaffold architecture. Recently, scaffolds with controlled shape and architecture have been fabricated using three-dimensional printing (3DP). Herein, we aimed to determine whether the much tighter control of microstructure of 3DP poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid/β-tricalcium phosphate (PLGA/β-TCP) scaffolds is more effective in promoting osteogenesis than porous scaffolds produced by solvent casting/porogen leaching. Methods: Physical and mechanical properties of porous and 3DP scaffolds were studied. The response of pre-osteoblasts to the scaffolds was analyzed after 14 days. Results: TThe 3DP scaffolds had a smoother surface (Ra: 22 ± 3 µm) relative to the highly rough surface of porous scaffolds (Ra: 110 ± 15 µm). Water contact angle was 112 ± 4° on porous and 76 ± 6° on 3DP scaffolds. Porous and 3DP scaffolds had the pore size of 408 ± 90 and 315 ± 17 µm and porosity of 85 ± 5% and 39 ± 7%, respectively. Compressive strength of 3DP scaffolds (4.0 ± 0.3 MPa) was higher than porous scaffolds (1.7 ± 0.2 MPa). Collagenous matrix deposition was similar on both scaffolds. Cells proliferated from day 1 to day 14 by fourfold in porous and by 3.8-fold in 3DP scaffolds. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity was 21-fold higher in 3DP scaffolds than porous scaffolds. Conclusion: The 3DP scaffolds show enhanced mechanical properties and ALP activity compared to porous scaffolds in vitro, suggesting that 3DP PLGA/β-TCP scaffolds are possibly more favorable for bone formation.
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.