ArticlePolymers2023
Cellulose-Based Scaffolds: A Comparative Study for Potential Application in Articular Cartilage.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainable Cellulose-Based Gels: Synthesis, Chemical Modification, and Biomedical Application.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A proof-of-concept study of an albumin-based bilayered scaffold for cartilage regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Harnessing biopolymeric double network hydrogels for cartilage repair: a review of current strategies.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Greening Bone Healing: The Emerging Role of Plant-Derived Exosome-Like Nanoparticles in Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Nanodelivery Strategies for STING Agonists: Toward Efficient Cancer Immunotherapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
- Article
- 3D printed osteochondral scaffolds: design strategies, present applications and future perspectives.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
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
Osteoarthritis is a highly prevalent disease worldwide that leads to cartilage loss. Tissue engineering, involving scaffolds, cells, and stimuli, has shown to be a promising strategy for its repair. Thus, this study aims to manufacture and characterise different scaffolds with poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) with commercial cellulose (microcrystalline (McC) and methyl cellulose (MC) or cellulose from agro-industrial residues (corncob (CcC)) and at different percentages, 1%, 2%, and 3%. PCL scaffolds were used as a control. Morphologically, the produced scaffolds presented porosities within the desired for cell incorporation (57% to 65%). When submitted to mechanical tests, the incorporation of cellulose affects the compression resistance of the majority of scaffolds. Regarding tensile strength, McC2% showed the highest values. It was proven that all manufactured scaffolds suffered degradation after 7 days of testing because of enzymatic reactions. This degradation may be due to the dissolution of PCL in the organic solvent. Biological tests revealed that PCL, CcC1%, and McC3% are the best materials to combine with human dental pulp stem/stromal cells. Overall, results suggest that cellulose incorporation in PCL scaffolds promotes cellular adhesion/proliferation. Methyl cellulose scaffolds demonstrated some advantageous compressive properties (closer to native cartilaginous tissue) to proceed to further studies for application in cartilage repair.
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.