ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2022
Integrating pore architectures to evaluate vascularization efficacy in silicate-based bioceramic scaffolds.
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Harnessing inter-spheroid spacing and structural connectivity to direct collective cell migration and host vessel integration in 3D engineered tissue.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- An Experimental Study on 3D-Printed Gyroid-Shaped TC4 Porous Scaffolds Guiding Angiogenesis and Osteogenesis in Bone Defect Areas.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2026Article
- Dental Implant Osseointegration Following Mandibular Augmentation Using 3D Printed Hydroxyapatite Blocks. An Experimental In Vivo Study.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
- Next-generation smart ophthalmic biomaterials: From passive response to active interaction and closed-loop control.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Current state of bioceramic bone repair materials in immune regulation: a review.Frontiers of medicine · 2025Review
- Polylactic Acid-Based Polymers Used for Facial Rejuvenation: A Narrative Review.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Review
- 3D-printed artificial bone scaffolds: the design of materials, the incorporation of bioactive substances, and the integration of vascularized tissue flaps.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Personalized bioceramic grafts for craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration.International journal of oral science · 2024Review
- Article
- New insight into biodegradable macropore filler on tuning mechanical properties and bone tissue ingrowth in sparingly dissolvable bioceramic scaffolds.Materials today. Bio · 2024Article
- Cuprorivaite/hardystonite/alginate composite hydrogel with thermionic effect for the treatment of peri-implant lesion.Regenerative biomaterials · 2024Article
- Recent advancement in vascularized tissue-engineered bone based on materials design and modification.Materials today. Bio · 2023Review
- Bioceramic scaffolds with triply periodic minimal surface architectures guide early-stage bone regeneration.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- The design of strut/TPMS-based pore geometries in bioceramic scaffolds guiding osteogenesis and angiogenesis in bone regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2023Article
- Osteoconductivity of bone substitutes with filament-based microarchitectures: Influence of directionality, filament dimension, and distance.International journal of bioprinting · 2023Article
- 3D-Printed Flat-Bone-Mimetic Bioceramic Scaffolds for Cranial Restoration.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2023Article
- Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pore architecture in bioceramic scaffolds plays an important role in facilitating vascularization efficiency during bone repair or orbital reconstruction. Many investigations have explored this relationship but lack integrating pore architectural features in a scaffold, hindering optimization of architectural parameters (geometry, size and curvature) to improve vascularization and consequently clinical outcomes. To address this challenge, we have developed an integrating design strategy to fabricate different pore architectures (cube, gyroid and hexagon) with different pore dimensions (∼350, 500 and 650 μm) in the silicate-based bioceramic scaffolds via digital light processing technique. The sintered scaffolds maintained high-fidelity pore architectures similar to the printing model. The hexagon- and gyroid-pore scaffolds exhibited the highest and lowest compressive strength (from 15 to 55 MPa), respectively, but the cube-pore scaffolds showed appreciable elastic modulus. Moreover, the gyroid-pore architecture contributed on a faster ion dissolution and mass decay
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.