Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36547353›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Current Advances in 3D Dynamic Cell Culture Systems.

Xin Huang, Zhengxiang Huang, Weidong Gao, Wendong Gao, Ruiying He, Yulin Li, Ross Crawford, Yinghong Zhou, Lan Xiao, Yin Xiao

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Translational Geroscience Strategies for Delaying Multimorbidity.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Xin HuangSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2430-2292
Zhengxiang HuangSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1194-2701
Weidong GaoSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Wendong GaoSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Ruiying HeCollege of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China.
Yulin LiThe Key Laboratory for Ultrafine Materials of Ministry of Education, State Key Laboratory of Bioreactor Engineering, Engineering Research Center for Biomedical Materials of Ministry of Education, School of Materials Science and Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, China.
Ross CrawfordSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Yinghong ZhouAustralia-China Centre for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Lan XiaoSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5227-9352
Yin XiaoSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Center of Biomedical Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1785-3491
Queensland University of Technology · AUEast China University of Science and Technology · CNGriffith University · AUHubei University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The traditional two-dimensional (2D) cell culture methods have a long history of mimicking in vivo cell growth. However, these methods cannot fully represent physiological conditions, which lack two major indexes of the in vivo environment; one is a three-dimensional 3D cell environment, and the other is mechanical stimulation; therefore, they are incapable of replicating the essential cellular communications between cell to cell, cell to the extracellular matrix, and cellular responses to dynamic mechanical stimulation in a physiological condition of body movement and blood flow. To solve these problems and challenges, 3D cell carriers have been gradually developed to provide a 3D matrix-like structure for cell attachment, proliferation, differentiation, and communication in static and dynamic culture conditions. 3D cell carriers in dynamic culture systems could primarily provide different mechanical stimulations which further mimic the real in vivo microenvironment. In this review, the current advances in 3D dynamic cell culture approaches have been introduced, with their advantages and disadvantages being discussed in comparison to traditional 2D cell culture in static conditions.

Indexed as

3D cell culturebioreactormechanical stimulation on cell behaviormicrocarrierorgan-on-a-chip

Identifiers

PMID36547353
PMCPMC9778081
OpenAlexW4312130015

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.