ArticlePolymers2026
Structure-Property Evolution of Cubic and Gyroid PLA Scaffolds During In Vitro Degradation Under Physiologically Relevant Conditions.
Article in Polymers, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The design of innovative biomaterials increasingly aims to reproduce the structure, properties, and behavior of natural tissues. Biomimetic materials are generally considered to promote biointegration. In bone tissue regeneration materials, biomimicry and mechanical competence represent complementary design objectives whose relative importance depends on the clinical requirements and the expected timeline of bone regeneration. In the present investigation, two types of 3D-printed PLA scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration, featuring conventional cubic and biomimetic gyroid-based triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) architectures, respectively, were evaluated. Their degradation behavior was investigated during immersion in a protein-rich cell culture medium under dynamic conditions at 37 °C, followed by mechanical characterization and analytical modeling of the property evolution. The cubic scaffolds exhibited approximately 210% higher apparent compressive modulus and more than fourfold higher apparent compressive strength compared with the gyroid scaffolds in the initial state. During 21 days of immersion, gyroid scaffolds showed progressive mass loss reaching approximately 13%, whereas cubic scaffolds exhibited a slight mass increase associated with fluid uptake. Both architectures experienced a reduction in mechanical properties; however, the gyroid structures showed faster structural deterioration due to their higher porosity, increased fluid accessibility, and greater fluid uptake and degradation-induced structural deterioration. The Residual Property Model accurately predicted the mechanical degradation of cubic scaffolds but was unable to predict the gyroid response due to the dominant contribution of mass loss and structural degradation. The overall results indicate a trade-off between the two architectural approaches, whereby enhanced biomimetic features are associated with reduced mechanical performance.
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.