ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2026
3D-printed PCL scaffolds: optimising material selection for specific bone regeneration applications.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Significant clinical challenges are posed by large bone defects, necessitating the use of scaffolds that combine mechanical stability with osteoinductive properties. While polycaprolactone (PCL) lends itself well to 3D printing, its limited bioactivity means it needs to be modified with bioactive additives. Various additives have been proposed to enhance PCL scaffolds, but a systematic comparative evaluation of their mechanical and biological effects is lacking. This hinders the optimal selection of materials for specific applications. In this study, we compared the effects of four additives-silver nanoparticles (AgNPs), osteogenon (OST), zinc oxide (ZnO) and vitroceramic calcium phosphate (CaPNPs)-when incorporated at a concentration of 0.5 wt% into 3D-printed PCL scaffolds. We comprehensively evaluated the mechanical properties, thermal characteristics, and osteoblast biocompatibility using tensile testing, differential scanning calorimetry, and SaOS-2 cell culture assays (MTT test, activity of alkaline phosphatase, production of collagen I and fluorescent staining with acridine orange or phalloidin). ZnO modification significantly enhanced the mechanical properties (834% strain at break versus 658% for pure PCL and an increased Young's modulus), as well as supporting cell viability (87 and 85%). Meanwhile, CaPNPs demonstrated the highest level of early-stage cell viability (103% after 24 h), although this was not statistically significant. All additives exhibited non-cytotoxic profiles with >80% cell viability and demonstrated time-dependent increases in alkaline phosphatase activity, but further evaluation for clinical application is essential. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for selecting PCL scaffold additives based on specific application requirements: ZnO is optimal for mechanically demanding applications, while CaPNPs could be optimal for facilitating rapid cell integration.
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.