Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36559137›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutics2022

Assessment of 3D-Printed Polycaprolactone, Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles and Diacrylate Poly(ethylene glycol) Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.

Ana Catarina Sousa, Sara Biscaia, Rui Alvites, Mariana Branquinho, Bruna Lopes, Patrícia Sousa, Joana Valente, Margarida Franco, José Domingos Santos, Carla Mendonça and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 3D-Printed GelMA/PEGDA/F127DA Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023
    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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ana Catarina SousaVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8800-2195
Sara BiscaiaCentre for Rapid and Sustainable Product Development (CDRSP), Polytechnic of Leiria, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2609-6878
Rui AlvitesVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1945-6377
Mariana BranquinhoVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1328-464X
Bruna LopesVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8168-2415
Patrícia SousaVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2531-3196
Joana ValenteCentre for Rapid and Sustainable Product Development (CDRSP), Polytechnic of Leiria, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2408-9762
Margarida FrancoCentre for Rapid and Sustainable Product Development (CDRSP), Polytechnic of Leiria, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal.
José Domingos SantosREQUIMTE-LAQV, Departamento de Engenharia Metalúrgica e Materiais, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.
Carla MendonçaVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.
Luís AtaydeVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.
Nuno AlvesCentre for Rapid and Sustainable Product Development (CDRSP), Polytechnic of Leiria, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5016-0868
Ana Colette MaurícioVeterinary Clinics Department, Abel Salazar Biomedical Sciences Institute (ICBAS), 4050-313 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-0018-9363
University of Lisbon · PTInstituto Politécnico de Leiria · PTUniversidade do Porto · PT

Funding

Agencia de Inovacao POCI-01-0145-FEDER-031146Agencia de Inovacao POCI-01-0247-FEDER-033877Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia 2021.05265.BDFundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia PAMI-ROTEIRO/0328/2013 (Nº 022158)Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia PEst-OE/AGR/UI0211/2011Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/146172/2019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/146689/2019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDB/04044/2020Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDP/04044/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Notwithstanding the advances achieved in the last decades in the field of synthetic bone substitutes, the development of biodegradable 3D-printed scaffolds with ideal mechanical and biological properties remains an unattained challenge. In the present work, a new approach to produce synthetic bone grafts that mimic complex bone structure is explored. For the first time, three scaffolds of various composition, namely polycaprolactone (PCL), PCL/hydroxyapatite nanoparticles (HANp) and PCL/HANp/diacrylate poly(ethylene glycol) (PEGDA), were manufactured by extrusion. Following the production and characterisation of the scaffolds, an in vitro evaluation was carried out using human dental pulp stem/stromal cells (hDPSCs). Through the findings, it was possible to conclude that, in all groups, the scaffolds were successfully produced presenting networks of interconnected channels, adequate porosity for migration and proliferation of osteoblasts (approximately 50%). Furthermore, according to the in vitro analysis, all groups were considered non-cytotoxic in contact with the cells. Nevertheless, the group with PEGDA revealed hydrophilic properties (15.15° ± 4.06) and adequate mechanical performance (10.41 MPa ± 0.934) and demonstrated significantly higher cell viability than the other groups analysed. The scaffolds with PEGDA suggested an increase in cell adhesion and proliferation, thus are more appropriate for bone regeneration. To conclude, findings in this study demonstrated that PCL, HANp and PEGDA scaffolds may have promising effects on bone regeneration and might open new insights for 3D tissue substitutes.

Indexed as

bone regenerationcritical bone defectsdiacrylate poly(ethylene glycol)hydroxyapatite nanoparticlespolycaprolactonescaffolds

Identifiers

PMID36559137
PMCPMC9782524
OpenAlexW4311002177

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.