Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36575530›Full record

ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2022

Direct 3D printed biocompatible microfluidics: assessment of human mesenchymal stem cell differentiation and cytotoxic drug screening in a dynamic culture system.

Oliver Riester, Stefan Laufer, Hans-Peter Deigner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Rapid Phenotypic Antibiotics Susceptibility Analysis by a 3D Printed Prototype.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Oliver RiesterInstitute of Precision Medicine, Furtwangen University, Jakob-Kienzle-Strasse 17, 78054, Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany.
Stefan LauferInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Department of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Auf Der Morgenstelle 8, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Hans-Peter DeignerInstitute of Precision Medicine, Furtwangen University, Jakob-Kienzle-Strasse 17, 78054, Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany. dei@hs-furtwangen.de.
Furtwangen University · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DE

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung FKZ:13FH5E01IAInterreg ref: 5115/3.17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn vivo-mimicking conditions are critical in in vitro cell analysis to obtain clinically relevant results. The required conditions, comparable to those prevalent in nature, can be provided by microfluidic dynamic cell cultures. Microfluidics can be used to fabricate and test the functionality and biocompatibility of newly developed nanosystems or to apply micro- and nanoelectromechanical systems embedded in a microfluidic system. However, the use of microfluidic systems is often hampered by their accessibility, acquisition cost, or customization, especially for scientists whose primary research focus is not microfluidics.

resultsHere we present a method for 3D printing that can be applied without special prior knowledge and sophisticated equipment to produce various ready-to-use microfluidic components with a size of 100 µm. Compared to other available methods, 3D printing using fused deposition modeling (FDM) offers several advantages, such as time-reduction and avoidance of sophisticated equipment (e.g., photolithography), as well as excellent biocompatibility and avoidance of toxic, leaching chemicals or post-processing (e.g., stereolithography). We further demonstrate the ease of use of the method for two relevant applications: a cytotoxicity screening system and an osteoblastic differentiation assay. To our knowledge, this is the first time an application including treatment, long-term cell culture and analysis on one chip has been demonstrated in a directly 3D-printed microfluidic chip.

conclusionThe direct 3D printing method is tested and validated for various microfluidic components that can be combined on a chip depending on the specific requirements of the experiment. The ease of use and production opens up the potential of microfluidics to a wide range of users, especially in biomedical research. Our demonstration of its use as a cytotoxicity screening system and as an assay for osteoblastic differentiation shows the methods potential in the development of novel biomedical applications. With the presented method, we aim to disseminate microfluidics as a standard method in biomedical research, thus improving the reproducibility and transferability of results to clinical applications.

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem CellsMicrofluidicsPrinting, Three-DimensionalCell DifferentiationDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansLab-On-A-Chip DevicesReproducibility of ResultsBiocompatibleDirect 3D printedDrug screening systemMicrofluidicMicrofluidic long-term cell cultureReady-to-useStem cell differentiation

Identifiers

PMID36575530
PMCPMC9793564
OpenAlexW4312201051

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.