ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2023
Micro-porous PLGA/
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cytocompatibility of a Poly(lactic-ACS omega · 2026Article
- Biomechanical research using advanced micro-nano devices: In-Vitro cell Characterization focus.Journal of advanced research · 2025Review
- 3D-printing of dipyridamole/thermoplastic polyurethane materials for bone regeneration.Drug delivery and translational research · 2025Article
- Review
- Review
- Harnessing the Potential of PLGA Nanoparticles for Enhanced Bone Regeneration.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
- Calcium Phosphate Biomaterials for 3D Bioprinting in Bone Tissue Engineering.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- 3D printing materials and 3D printed surgical devices in oral and maxillofacial surgery: design, workflow and effectiveness.Regenerative biomaterials · 2024Review
- Application of metal-organic frameworks-based functional composite scaffolds in tissue engineering.Regenerative biomaterials · 2024Review
- Absorbable calcium and phosphorus bioactive membranes promote bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells osteogenic differentiation for bone regeneration.Open life sciences · 2024Article
- Advances in functional coatings on biliary stents.Regenerative biomaterials · 2024Review
- β-TCP from 3D-printed composite scaffolds acts as an effective phosphate source during osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stromal cells.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Article
- Clinical translation of 3D bioprinting in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction: Recent progress and future directions.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchReview
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The 3D printing process of fused deposition modelling is an attractive fabrication approach to create tissue-engineered bone substitutes to regenerate large mandibular bone defects, but often lacks desired surface porosity for enhanced protein adsorption and cell adhesion. Solvent-based printing leads to the spontaneous formation of micropores on the scaffold's surface upon solvent removal, without the need for further post processing. Our aim is to create and characterize porous scaffolds using a new formulation composed of mechanically stable poly(lactic-co-glycol acid) and osteoconductive β-tricalcium phosphate with and without the addition of elastic thermoplastic polyurethane prepared by solvent-based 3D-printing technique. Large-scale regenerative scaffolds can be 3D-printed with adequate fidelity and show porosity at multiple levels analysed via micro-computer tomography, scanning electron microscopy and N
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.