ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Integrating conductive electrodes into hydrogel-based microfluidic chips for real-time monitoring of cell response.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hydrogel-Based Monitoring in Perioperative Anesthesia: A Conceptual Review and Translational Perspective.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The conventional real-time screening in organs-on-chips is limited to optical tracking of pre-tagged cells and biological agents. This work introduces an efficient biofabrication protocol to integrate tunable hydrogel electrodes into 3D bioprinted-on-chips. We established our method of fabricating cell-laden hydrogel-based microfluidic chips through digital light processing-based 3D bioprinting. Our conductive ink includes poly-(3,4-ethylene-dioxythiophene)-polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT: PSS) microparticles doped in polyethylene glycol diacrylate (PEGDA). We optimized the manufacturing process of PEDOT: PSS microparticles characterized our conductive ink for different 3D bioprinting parameters, geometries, and materials conditions. While the literature is limited to 0.5% w/v for PEDOT: PSS microparticle concentration, we increased their concentration to 5% w/v with superior biological responses. We measured the conductivity in the 3-15 m/m for a range of 0.5%-5% w/v microparticles, and we showed the effectiveness of 3D-printed electrodes for predicting cell responses when encapsulated in gelatin-methacryloyl (GelMA). Interestingly, a higher cellular activity was observed in the case of 5% w/v microparticles compared to 0.5% w/v microparticles. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy measurements indicated significant differences in cell densities and spheroid sizes embedded in GelMA microtissues.
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.