Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37273796›Full record

ArticleMaterials today. Bio2023

3D-printed placental-derived bioinks for skin tissue regeneration with improved angiogenesis and wound healing properties.

Zahra Bashiri, Motahareh Rajabi Fomeshi, Hatef Ghasemi Hamidabadi, Davod Jafari, Sanaz Alizadeh, Maryam Nazm Bojnordi, Gorka Orive, Alireza Dolatshahi-Pirouz, Maria Zahiri, Rui L Reis and 2 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials today. Bio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Zahra BashiriDepartment of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Motahareh Rajabi FomeshiCellular and Molecular Research Centre, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hatef Ghasemi HamidabadiDepartment of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Davod JafariDepartment of Medical Biotechnology, Faculty of Allied Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sanaz AlizadehCellular and Molecular Research Centre, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam Nazm BojnordiDepartment of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Gorka OriveNanoBioCel Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 01006, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain.
Alireza Dolatshahi-PirouzDepartment of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark.
Maria ZahiriThe Persian Gulf Marine Biotechnology Research Center, The Persian Gulf Biomedical Sciences Research Institute, Bushehr University of Medical Sciences, Bushehr, Iran.
Rui L Reis3Bs Research Group, I3Bs - Research Institute on Biomaterials, Biodegradable and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University of Minho, AvePark, Guimaraes, Portugal.
Subhas C Kundu3Bs Research Group, I3Bs - Research Institute on Biomaterials, Biodegradable and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University of Minho, AvePark, Guimaraes, Portugal.
Mazaher GholipourmalekabadiCellular and Molecular Research Centre, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRMazandaran University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Minho · PTBiotechnology Research Center · IRTechnical University of Denmark · DKUniversity of the Basque Country · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracellular matrix (ECM)-based bioinks has attracted much attention in recent years for 3D printing of native-like tissue constructs. Due to organ unavailability, human placental ECM can be an alternative source for the construction of 3D print composite scaffolds for the treatment of deep wounds. In this study, we use different concentrations (1.5%, 3% and 5%w/v) of ECM derived from the placenta, sodium-alginate and gelatin to prepare a printable bioink biomimicking natural skin. The printed hydrogels' morphology, physical structure, mechanical behavior, biocompatibility, and angiogenic property are investigated. The optimized ECM (5%w/v) 3D printed scaffold is applied on full-thickness wounds created in a mouse model. Due to their unique native-like structure, the ECM-based scaffolds provide a non-cytotoxic microenvironment for cell adhesion, infiltration, angiogenesis, and proliferation. In contrast, they do not show any sign of immune response to the host. Notably, the biodegradation, swelling rate, mechanical property, cell adhesion and angiogenesis properties increase with the increase of ECM concentrations in the construct. The ECM 3D printed scaffold implanted into deep wounds increases granulation tissue formation, angiogenesis, and re-epithelialization due to the presence of ECM components in the construct, when compared with printed scaffold with no ECM and no treatment wound. Overall, our findings demonstrate that the 5% ECM 3D scaffold supports the best deep wound regeneration

Indexed as

3D printed scaffoldAlginate/gelatinECM bioinkExtracellular matrixPlacentaWound healing

Identifiers

PMID37273796
PMCPMC10239019
OpenAlexW4377157604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.