ArticleActa biomaterialia2023
The effect of multi-material architecture on the ex vivo osteochondral integration of bioprinted constructs.
Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2023. 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.
- Hydrogel microarchitecture as a regulatory cue for in vitro odontogenic differentiation.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2026Article
- Design and Fabrication of Biomimetic Gradient Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds: Evolution from Single-Gradient to Multi-Gradient.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Mechanobiology-based strategies for the maturation of biofabricated cartilage constructs.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Modeling and targeting the hostile physicochemical niche in bone metastasis: from experimental platforms to niche-directed therapy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Construction of organoids using bioprinting technology: a frontier exploration of cartilage repair.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Review
- 3D bioprinted scaffolds for osteochondral regeneration: advancements and applications.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Modern Approach to Testing the Biocompatibility of Osteochondral Scaffolds in Accordance with the 3Rs Principle─PreclinicalACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Article
- Strategies for Craniofacial Tissue Engineering: Innovations for Scalable Bone Regeneration.Plastic and aesthetic research · 2025Article
- Materials Suitable for Osteochondral Regeneration.ACS omega · 2024Review
- Integrating bioprinting, cell therapies and drug delivery towards in vivo regeneration of cartilage, bone and osteochondral tissue.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Review
- Is 3D Printing Promising for Osteochondral Tissue Regeneration?ACS applied bio materials · 2023Review
- Double-Reinforced Fish Gelatin Composite Scaffolds for Osteochondral Substitutes.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Nanocomposite Bioprinting for Tissue Engineering Applications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Development of photoreactive demineralized bone matrix 3D printing colloidal inks for bone tissue engineering.Regenerative biomaterials · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extrusion bioprinted constructs for osteochondral tissue engineering were fabricated to study the effect of multi-material architecture on encapsulated human mesenchymal stem cells' tissue-specific matrix deposition and integration into an ex vivo porcine osteochondral explant model. Two extrusion fiber architecture groups with differing transition regions and degrees of bone- and cartilage-like bioink mixing were employed. The gradient fiber (G-Fib) architecture group showed an increase in chondral integration over time, 18.5 ± 0.7 kPa on Day 21 compared to 9.6 ± 1.6 kPa on Day 1 for the required peak push-out force, and the segmented fiber (S-Fib) architecture group did not, which corresponded to the increase in sulfated glycosaminoglycan deposition noted only in the G-Fib group and the staining for cellularity and tissue-specific matrix deposition at the fiber-defect boundary. Conversely, the S-Fib architecture was associated with significant mineralization over time, but the G-Fib architecture was not. Notably, both fiber groups also had similar chondral integration as a re-inserted osteochondral tissue control. While architecture did dictate differences in the cells' responses to their environment, architecture was not shown to distinguish a statistically significant difference in tissue integration via fiber push-out testing within a given time point or explant region. Use of this three-week osteochondral model demonstrates that these bioink formulations support the fabrication of cell-laden constructs that integrate into explanted tissue as capably as natural tissue and encapsulate osteochondral matrix-producing cells, and it also highlights the important role that spatial architecture plays in the engineering of multi-phasic tissue environments. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Here, an ex vivo model was used to interrogate fundamental questions about the effect of multi-material scaffold architectural choices on osteochondral tissue integration. Cell-encapsulating constructs resembling stratified osteochondral tissue were 3D printed with architecture consisting of either gradient transitions or segmented transitions between the bone-like and cartilage-like bioink regions. The printed constructs were assessed alongside re-inserted natural tissue plugs via mechanical tissue integration push-out testing, biochemical assays, and histology. Differences in osteochondral matrix deposition were observed based on architecture, and both printed groups demonstrated cartilage integration similar to the native tissue plug group. As 3D printing becomes commonplace within biomaterials and tissue engineering, this work illustrates critical 3D co-culture interactions and demonstrates the importance of considering architecture when interpreting the results of studies utilizing spatially complex, multi-material scaffolds.
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.