ArticleScientific reports2025
Fabrication of a novel 3D-printed perfusion bioreactor for complex cell culture models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Additive Manufacturing for Extracellular Vesicle Therapeutics: Engineering Strategies for Production, Isolation, and Delivery.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Perfusion development and its potential for cell therapy manufacturing with adherent cells.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Synthetic control of implanted engineered liver tissue growth.Science advances · 2026Article
- The 3D landscape of infection: spatial organization andFrontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Human preclinical multiple myeloma in vitro models for disease modeling and therapy screening.Journal of biological engineering · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing cancer care: Bioprinting prostate cancer stem cells for targeted treatments.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Cell culture platform fabrication methods and applications.Tzu chi medical journalReview
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
We introduce a novel fabrication method for developing a 3D-printed perfusion bioreactor (3D-PBR) to facilitate the in situ growth and differentiation of human bone marrow (BM)-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) while enabling coculture with vascular cells. To recapitulate human physiology, in vitro platforms must incorporate several key features of their native target organ. This often entails a supportive 3D architecture for growing and differentiating multiple human cell types in situ under perfusion. Other essential characteristics include reproducibility, ease of customization, and biocompatibility. Our 3D-PBR combines these features and was fabricated using a biocompatible resin-based polymer, which was 3D-printed, followed by the addition of a permeable membrane to create a coculture microenvironment. MSCs were encapsulated in a collagen-fibrin gel alongside human endothelium within the 3D-PBR. The physical cues that our 3D-PBR provided facilitated the differentiation of MSCs into specific lineages, such as adipocytes and osteoblasts. Immunohistochemistry images demonstrated that cells grown in the 3D-PBR exhibited more physiologically relevant BM perivascular niche markers compared to static culture models. Our method utilizes emerging 3D printing techniques and alternative materials, departing from traditional PDMS-based soft lithography. These advancements in fabrication further enhance in vitro platforms for diverse cell culture models and vascular permeability assays.
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.