ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Mechanical Characterization of Porous Bone-like Scaffolds with Complex Microstructures for Bone Regeneration.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Calcium-enriched mesoporous silica/PLGA scaffolds enhance bone repair in a rabbit femoral condylar defect model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advancing Scaffold Architecture for Bone Tissue Engineering: A Comparative Study of 3D-Printed β-TCP Constructs in Dynamic Culture with pBMSC.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Biomimetic Additive Manufacturing: Engineering Complexity Inspired by Nature's Simplicity.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The patient-specific treatment of bone fractures using porous osteoconductive scaffolds has faced significant clinical challenges due to insufficient mechanical strength and bioactivity. These properties are essential for osteogenesis, bone bridging, and bone regeneration. Therefore, it is crucial to develop and characterize biocompatible, biodegradable, and mechanically robust scaffolds for effective bone regeneration. The objective of this study is to systematically investigate the mechanical performance of SimuBone, a medical-grade biocompatible and biodegradable material, using 10 distinct triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) designs with various internal structures. To assess the material's tensile properties, tensile structures based on ASTM D638-14 (Design IV) were fabricated, while standard torsion structures were designed and fabricated to evaluate torsional properties. Additionally, this work examined the compressive properties of the 10 TPMS scaffold designs, parametrically designed in the Rhinoceros 3D environment and subsequently fabricated using fused deposition modeling (FDM) additive manufacturing. The FDM fabrication process utilized a microcapillary nozzle (heated to 240 °C) with a diameter of 400 µm and a print speed of 10 mm/s, depositing material on a heated surface maintained at 60 °C. It was observed that SimuBone had a shear modulus of 714.79 ± 11.97 MPa as well as an average yield strength of 44 ± 1.31 MPa. Scaffolds fabricated with horizontal material deposition exhibited the highest tensile modulus (5404.20 ± 192.30 MPa), making them ideal for load-bearing applications. Also, scaffolds with large voids required thicker walls to prevent collapse. The
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.