ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Optimized 3D-Printed Polylactic Acid/Graphene Oxide Scaffolds for Enhanced 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 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.
- Injectable Short Nanofiber Fragments Enable Conformal Fibrous Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering on Complex Surfaces.Macromolecular rapid communications · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional (3D) printed scaffolds have emerged as promising tools for bone regeneration, but the optimal structural design and pore size remain unclear. Polylactic acid (PLA) reinforced with graphene oxide (GO) offers enhanced mechanical and biological performance, yet systematic evaluation of architecture and pore size is limited.
methodsTwo scaffold architectures (lattice-type and dode-type) with multiple pore sizes were fabricated using UV-curable PLA/GO resin. Physical accuracy, porosity, and mechanical properties were assessed through compression and fatigue testing. Based on in vitro screening, four pore sizes (930 μm, 690 μm, 558 μm, 562 μm) within the dode-type structure were analyzed. The 558 μm and 562 μm scaffolds, showing distinct fracture thresholds, were further evaluated in rat and rabbit calvarial defect models for inflammation and bone regeneration.
resultsIn vitro testing revealed that while 930 μm and 690 μm scaffolds exhibited superior compressive strength, the 562 μm scaffold showed a unique critical fracture behavior, and the 558 μm scaffold offered comparable stability with higher resistance to premature failure. In vivo studies confirmed excellent biocompatibility in both groups, with early bone formation favored in the 558 μm scaffold and more continuous and mature bone observed in the 562 μm scaffold at later stages.
conclusionsThis stepwise strategy-from structural design to pore size screening and preclinical validation-demonstrates that threshold-level mechanical properties can influence osteogenesis. PLA/GO scaffolds optimized at 558 μm and 562 μm provide a translationally relevant balance between mechanical stability and biological performance for bone tissue engineering.
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.