Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36787632›Full record

ArticleBiofabrication2023

Approximating scaffold printability utilizing computational methods.

Ashkan Sedigh, Pejman Ghelich, Jacob Quint, Evelyn C Mollocana-Lara, Mohamadmahdi Samandari, Ali Tamayol, Ryan E Tomlinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biofabrication, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors.

Ashkan SedighDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2377-8977
Pejman GhelichDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Jacob QuintDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Evelyn C Mollocana-LaraDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Mohamadmahdi SamandariDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Ali TamayolDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Ryan E TomlinsonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.

Funding

Suturable bioprinted vascularized muscle constructs for treatment of skeletal muscle lossR01AR077132 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SHIN, SU RYON, TAMAYOL, ALI · 2021 to 2025
$2.6M
Microengineered scaffolds carrying patient-specific cells and growth factors for treatment of volumetric muscle lossR01AR073822 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI TAMAYOL, ALI · 2018 to 2022
$1.8M
NGF-TrkA Signaling in Load-Induced Bone FormationR01AR074953 · NIAMS · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI TOMLINSON, RYAN · 2019 to 2023
$1.7M
Regenerative Engineering of Musculoskeletal Tissues- a Convergence Doctoral Training ProgramT32AR079114 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI LAURENCIN, CATO T. · 2021 to 2025
$1.1M
NGF-TrkA Signaling in Dental Implant Osseointegration and OsseoperceptionR03DE028397 · NIDCR · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI TOMLINSON, RYAN · 2019 to 2020
$312k
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR073822NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR074953NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR077132NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR079114NIDCR NIH HHS R03 DE028397
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioprinting facilitates the generation of complex, three-dimensional (3D), cell-based constructs for various applications. Although multiple bioprinting technologies have been developed, extrusion-based systems have become the dominant technology due to the diversity of materials (bioinks) that can be utilized, either individually or in combination. However, each bioink has unique material properties and extrusion characteristics that affect bioprinting utility, accuracy, and precision. Here, we have extended our previous work to achieve high precision (i.e. repeatability) and printability across samples by optimizing bioink-specific printing parameters. Specifically, we hypothesized that a fuzzy inference system (FIS) could be used as a computational method to address the imprecision in 3D bioprinting test data and uncover the optimal printing parameters for a specific bioink that result in high accuracy and precision. To test this hypothesis, we have implemented a FIS model consisting of four inputs (bioink concentration, printing flow rate, speed, and temperature) and two outputs to quantify the precision (scaffold bioprinted linewidth variance) and printability. We validate our use of the bioprinting precision index with both standard and normalized printability factors. Finally, we utilize optimized printing parameters to bioprint scaffolds containing up to 30 × 10

Indexed as

BioprintingPrinting, Three-DimensionalTechnologyTissue EngineeringTissue Scaffoldsapproximationextrusion bioprintingfuzzy systemgelatinprecisionprintability

Identifiers

PMID36787632
PMCPMC10123880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.