ArticleMicromachines2025
A Versatile Platform for Designing and Fabricating Multi-Material Perfusable 3D Microvasculatures.
Article in Micromachines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomedical Materials and Fabrication Methods for Construction of In Vitro Neurovascular Unit Models.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Volumetric Control vs. Pneumatic Pressure: A Comparative Analysis of Extrusion in 3D Bioprinting.Micromachines · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Perfusable microvasculature is critical for advancing in vitro tissue models, particularly for neural applications where limited diffusion impairs organoid growth and fails to replicate neurovascular function. This study presents a versatile fabrication platform that integrates mesh-driven design, two-photon lithography (TPL), and modular interfacing to create multi-material, perfusable 3D microvasculatures. Various 2D and 3D capillary paths were test-printed using both polygonal and lattice support strategies. A double-layered capillary scaffold based on the Hilbert curve was used for comparative materials testing. Methods for printing rigid (OrmoComp), moderately stiff hydrogel (polyethylene glycol diacrylate, PEGDA 700), and soft elastomeric (photocurable polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS) materials were developed and evaluated. Cone support structures enabled high-fidelity printing of the softer materials. A compact heat-shrink tubing interface provided leak-free perfusion without bulky fittings. Physiologically relevant flow velocities and Dextran diffusion through the scaffold were successfully demonstrated. Cytocompatibility assays confirmed that all TPL-printed scaffold materials supported human neural stem cell viability. Among peripheral components, lids fabricated via fused deposition modeling designed to hold microfluidic needle adapters exhibited good biocompatibility, while those made using liquid crystal display-based photopolymerization showed significant cytotoxicity despite indirect exposure. Overall, this platform enables creation of multi-material microvascular systems facilitated by TPL technology for complex, 3D neurovascular modeling, blood-brain barrier studies, and integration into vascularized organ-on-chip applications.
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.