ArticleBioprocess and biosystems engineering2024
3D printed scaffolds of biosilica and spongin from marine sponges: analysis of genotoxicity and cytotoxicity for bone tissue repair.
Article in Bioprocess and biosystems engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Croaker Fish Bone-Derived Hydroxyapatite as a Sustainable Source for 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.Marine drugs · 2026Article
- Bioglass-Reinforced Spongin-Like Collagen Scaffolds for Osteoporotic Bone Tissue Engineering.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Deciphering the Toxicity of Metal Tungstates and Molybdates: Effects on L929 Cell Metabolic Activity, Oxidative Stress, and Genotoxicity.Journal of applied toxicology : JAT · 2025Article
- RNA interference-mediated osteoprotegerin silencing increases the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand/osteoprotegerin ratio and promotes osteoclastogenesis.World journal of stem cells · 2025Article
- Casting Skin Dressing Containing Extractions of the Organic Part of Marine Sponges for Wound Healing.ACS applied bio materials · 2025Article
- Review
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
Abstract
Biosilica (BS) and spongin (SPG) from marine sponges are highlighted for their potential to promote bone regeneration. Moreover, 3D printing is introduced as a technology for producing bone grafts with optimized porous structures, allowing for better cell attachment, proliferation, and differentiation. Thus, this study aimed to characterize the BS and BS/SPG 3D printed scaffolds and to evaluate the biological effects in vitro. The scaffolds were printed using an ink containing 4 wt.% of sodium alginate. The physicochemical characteristics of BS and BS/SPG 3D printed scaffolds were analyzed by SEM, EDS, FTIR, porosity, evaluation of mass loss, and pH measurement. For in vitro analysis, the cellular viability of the MC3T3-E1 cell lineage was assessed using the AlamarBlue
Indexed as
Identifiers
38869621What 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.