ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2023
Flow performance of porous implants with different geometry: Line, surface, and volume structures.
Article in International journal of bioprinting, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coupling CFD and Machine Learning to Assess Flow Properties in Porous Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Parametric Design of Porous Structure and Optimal Porosity Gradient Distribution Based on Root-Shaped Implants.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Additive manufacturing has enormous advantage of personalized adaptation. Particularly, porous implants have been widely used in clinical practice. Porous implant has the advantages and abilities to promote tissue growth and mass transfer, which are closely related to pore morphology. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of three porous structures, i.e., line structure, surface structure, and volume structure, on the flow properties of implants at different porosity. Therefore, a unit cell was selected from each type of structure (oct truss [OT], gyroid [G], and schwarz p [P]) as a typical cell, where OT is a line structure, G is a surface structure, and P is a volume structure. The scaffolds with different porosity of these cells were customized, and the shape parameters were measured and calculated. Then, the flow performance of three different scaffolds in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium was simulated by using computational fluid dynamics, and the flow velocity, permeability, and wall shear stress, which can reflect their biological properties, were calculated and compared. The results showed that the pore shape and porosity of porous implants greatly affected the physical parameters and performance of structures. These findings will contribute to unit cell selection and future performance optimization of porous implants.
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.