Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38830883›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

3D-bioprinted GelMA/gelatin/amniotic membrane extract (AME) scaffold loaded with keratinocytes, fibroblasts, and endothelial cells for skin tissue engineering.

Zahra Pazhouhnia, Alireza Noori, Ali Farzin, Keyvan Khoshmaram, Mahdieh Hoseinpour, Jafar Ai, Marzieh Ebrahimi, Nasrin Lotfibakhshaiesh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Histological Processing of Scaffolds: Challenges and Solutions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025
    Review
  16. Extracellular-Matrix-Mimetic Hydrogels by Using Nanomaterials.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

8 authors.

Zahra PazhouhniaDepartment of Tissue Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Alireza NooriDepartment of Tissue Engineering and Applied Cell Sciences, School of Medicine, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran.
Ali FarzinMaterial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
Keyvan KhoshmaramDepartment of Life Science Engineering, Faculty of New Science and Technologies, University of Tehran, Tehran, 1417935840, Iran.
Mahdieh HoseinpourDepartment of Tissue Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Jafar AiDepartment of Tissue Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Marzieh EbrahimiDepartment of Stem Cells and Developmental Biology, Cell Sciences Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Nasrin LotfibakhshaieshDepartment of Tissue Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. n-lotfiba@tums.ac.ir.

Funding

Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services TUMS.VCR.REC.1398.972
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gelatin-methacryloyl (GelMA) is a highly adaptable biomaterial extensively utilized in skin regeneration applications. However, it is frequently imperative to enhance its physical and biological qualities by including supplementary substances in its composition. The purpose of this study was to fabricate and characterize a bi-layered GelMA-gelatin scaffold using 3D bioprinting. The upper section of the scaffold was encompassed with keratinocytes to simulate the epidermis, while the lower section included fibroblasts and HUVEC cells to mimic the dermis. A further step involved the addition of amniotic membrane extract (AME) to the scaffold in order to promote angiogenesis. The incorporation of gelatin into GelMA was found to enhance its stability and mechanical qualities. While the Alamar blue test demonstrated that a high concentration of GelMA (20%) resulted in a decrease in cell viability, the live/dead cell staining revealed that incorporation of AME increased the quantity of viable HUVECs. Further, gelatin upregulated the expression of KRT10 in keratinocytes and VIM in fibroblasts. Additionally, the histological staining results demonstrated the formation of well-defined skin layers and the creation of extracellular matrix (ECM) in GelMA/gelatin hydrogels during a 14-day culture period. Our study showed that a 3D-bioprinted composite scaffold comprising GelMA, gelatin, and AME can be used to regenerate skin tissues.

Indexed as

AmnionBioprintingFibroblastsGelatinHuman Umbilical Vein Endothelial CellsKeratinocytesTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsCell SurvivalEndothelial CellsHumansMethacrylatesPrinting, Three-DimensionalSkinGelatingelatin methacryloylMethacrylatesAmniotic membrane extractGelatinGelMASkin regeneration

Identifiers

PMID38830883
PMCPMC11148016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.