Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34719861›Full record

ArticleAdvanced healthcare materials2022

3D Printed Dual-Porosity Scaffolds: The Combined Effect of Stiffness and Porosity in the Modulation of Macrophage Polarization.

Sandra Camarero-Espinosa, Maria Carlos-Oliveira, Hong Liu, João F Mano, Nicole Bouvy, Lorenzo Moroni

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced healthcare materials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Recent Advances in Silk Fibroin Derived fromJournal of functional biomaterials · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Research Progress on Biomaterials with Immunomodulatory Effects in Bone Regeneration.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Sandra Camarero-EspinosaMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Complex Tissue Regeneration Department, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200MD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0414-7141
Maria Carlos-OliveiraMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Complex Tissue Regeneration Department, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200MD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3092-0273
Hong LiuDepartment of General Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200MD, The Netherlands.
João F ManoDepartment of Chemistry, CICECO - Aveiro Institute of Materials, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, 3810-193, Portugal.
Nicole BouvyDepartment of General Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200MD, The Netherlands.
Lorenzo MoroniMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Complex Tissue Regeneration Department, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200MD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1298-6025
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLIkerbasque · ESUniversity of Aveiro · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tissue regeneration evolves toward the biofabrication of sophisticated 3D scaffolds. However, the success of these will be contingent to their capability to integrate within the host. The control of the mechanical or topographical properties of the implant appears as an ideal method to modulate the immune response. However, the interplay between these properties is yet not clear. Dual-porosity scaffolds with varying mechanical and topographical features are created, and their immunomodulatory properties in rat alveolar macrophages in vitro and in vivo in a rat subcutaneous model are evaluated. Scaffolds are fabricated via additive manufacturing and thermally induced phase separation methods from two copolymers with virtually identical chemistries, but different stiffness. The introduction of porosity enables the modulation of macrophages toward anti-inflammatory phenotypes, with secretion of IL-10 and TGF-β. Soft scaffolds (<5 kPa) result in a pro-inflammatory phenotype in contrast to stiffer (>40 kPa) scaffolds of comparable porosities supporting a pro-healing phenotype, which appears to be related to the surface spread area of cells. In vivo, stiff scaffolds integrate, while softer scaffolds appear encapsulated after three weeks of implantation, resulting in chronic inflammation after six weeks. The results demonstrate the importance of evaluating the interplay between topography and stiffness of candidate scaffolds.

Indexed as

Printing, Three-DimensionalTissue ScaffoldsAnimalsMacrophage ActivationMacrophagesPorosityRats3D printingdual-porosityimmunomodulationmacrophage polarization

Identifiers

PMID34719861
PMCPMC11468864
OpenAlexW3209588035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.