ArticleCurrent protocols2026
Evaluating Mineral Deposition in Bone-Regenerative Collagen-Based Scaffolds Using High-Resolution microCT and 3D Computational Segmentation.
Article in Current protocols, 2026. 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.
- Assessment of Bone Regeneration in Rabbit Calvarial Defects Treated With Mineralized Collagen-Based Scaffolds Using In Vivo MicroCT and Three-Dimensional Rendering.Current protocols · 2026Article
- Evaluating Mineral Deposition in Bone-Regenerative Collagen-Based Scaffolds Using High-Resolution microCT and 3D Computational Segmentation.Current protocols · 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
Bone regeneration depends on coordinated interactions among cells, extracellular matrices, and the dynamic microenvironment within engineered constructs. Mineralized collagen-glycosaminoglycan (MC-GAG) scaffolds are designed to replicate key features of native bone matrix, yet their mineral accumulation and mechanical performance remain lower than those of mature bone, making precise evaluation of mineral deposition essential. High-resolution microCT imaging provides nondestructive, three-dimensional (3D) visualization of mineral distribution, density, and microarchitecture with substantially improved fidelity. Through dynamic, angle-dependent calibration and scan-specific recalibration, our microCT scanner HiCT minimizes motion- and temperature-related artifacts and enables consistent, high-resolution imaging suitable for small scaffold systems. This protocol outlines an integrated workflow combining high-resolution microCT scanning with advanced image segmentation to assess mineralization within MC-GAG scaffolds. The method includes scaffold fabrication, chemical cross-linking, and human mesenchymal stem cell culture, followed by stable positioning in custom 3D-printed racks to ensure precise imaging geometry. Reconstruction and threshold-based segmentation in a DICOM viewer such as ORS Dragonfly allow separation of scaffold structure from higher-density mineral phases, providing detailed visualization and quantitative analysis of mineral deposition. This reproducible framework enhances the characterization of bone-regenerative biomaterials and supports efforts to engineer scaffolds that more closely mimic the structural and functional properties of native bone. © 2026 The Author(s). Current Protocols published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: Fabrication of bone regenerative mineralized collagen scaffolds Basic Protocol 2: High-resolution microCT scanning and microstructural analysis of the MC-GAG scaffolds.
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.