Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35745964›Full record

ArticlePolymers2022

3D-Printed PLA-Bioglass Scaffolds with Controllable Calcium Release and MSC Adhesion for Bone Tissue Engineering.

Eva Schätzlein, Christoph Kicker, Nicolas Söhling, Ulrike Ritz, Jonas Neijhoft, Dirk Henrich, Johannes Frank, Ingo Marzi, Andreas Blaeser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 3D Culture of MSCs for Clinical Application.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Measuring Bone Healing: Parameters and Scores in Comparison.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Eva SchätzleinInstitute for BioMedical Printing Technology, Technical University of Darmstadt, 64289 Darmstadt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2358-6476
Christoph KickerTechnical University of Darmstadt, 64289 Darmstadt, Germany.
Nicolas SöhlingDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Ulrike RitzBiomaTiCS Group, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55122 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8936-3227
Jonas NeijhoftDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Dirk HenrichDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9728-4032
Johannes FrankDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Ingo MarziDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Andreas BlaeserInstitute for BioMedical Printing Technology, Technical University of Darmstadt, 64289 Darmstadt, Germany.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DETechnische Universität Darmstadt · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large bone defects are commonly treated by replacement with auto- and allografts, which have substantial drawbacks including limited supply, donor site morbidity, and possible tissue rejection. This study aimed to improve bone defect treatment using a custom-made filament for tissue engineering scaffolds. The filament consists of biodegradable polylactide acid (PLA) and a varying amount (up to 20%) of osteoconductive S53P4 bioglass. By employing an innovative, additive manufacturing technique, scaffolds with optimized physico-mechanical and biological properties were produced. The scaffolds feature adjustable macro- and microporosity (200-2000 µm) with adaptable mechanical properties (83-135 MPa). Additionally, controllable calcium release kinetics (0-0.25 nMol/µL after 24 h), tunable mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) adhesion potential (after 24 h by a factor of 14), and proliferation (after 168 h by a factor of 18) were attained. Microgrooves resulting from the 3D-printing process on the surface act as a nucleus for cell aggregation, thus being a potential cell niche for spheroid formation or possible cell guidance. The scaffold design with its adjustable biomechanics and the bioglass with its antimicrobial properties are of particular importance for the preclinical translation of the results. This study comprehensibly demonstrates the potential of a 3D-printed bioglass composite scaffold for the treatment of critical-sized bone defects.

Indexed as

3D printingbioactive glassbiofabricationbone tissue engineeringcell seedingfused filament fabricationPLA bioglasspolymer ceramic composites

Identifiers

PMID35745964
PMCPMC9229101
OpenAlexW4282568271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.