The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
3D‐Bioprinted Osteoblast‐Laden Nanocomposite Hydrogel Constructs with Induced Microenvironments Promote Cell Viability, Differentiation, and Osteogenesis both In Vitro and In Vivo
Open accessAbstract
An osteoblast‐laden nanocomposite hydrogel construct, based on polyethylene glycol diacrylate (PEGDA)/laponite XLG nanoclay ([Mg 5.34 Li 0.66 Si 8 O 20(OH)4]Na 0.66, clay)/hyaluronic acid sodium salt (HA) bio‐inks, is developed by a two‐channel 3D bioprinting method. The novel biodegradable bio‐ink A, comprised of a poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG)–clay nanocomposite crosslinked hydrogel, is used to facilitate 3D‐bioprinting and enables the efficient delivery of oxygen and nutrients to growing cells. HA with encapsulated primary rat osteoblasts (ROBs) is applied as bio‐ink B with a view to improving cell viability, distribution uniformity, and deposition efficiency. The cell‐laden PEG–clay constructs not only encapsulated osteoblasts with more than 95% viability in the short term but also exhibited excellent osteogenic ability in the long term, due to the release of bioactive ions (magnesium ions, Mg 2+ and silicon ions, Si 4+), which induces the suitable microenvironment to promote the differentiation of the loaded exogenous ROBs, both in vitro and in vivo. This 3D‐bioprinting method holds much promise for bone tissue regeneration in terms of cell engraftment, survival, and ultimately long‐term function.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lutolf, M. P., & Hubbell, J. A. (2005) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1055 · Cited by 4,551
Printing three-dimensional tissue analogues with decellularized extracellular matrix bioink
Pati, F., Jang, J., Ha, D.-H., Won Kim, S., Rhie, J.-W., Shim, J.-H., Kim, D.-H., & Cho, D.-W. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms4935 · Cited by 1,904
Reffitt, D. M., Ogston, N., Jugdaohsingh, R., Cheung, H. F. J., Evans, B. A. J., Thompson, R. P. H., Powell, J. J., & Hampson, G. N. (2003) · Bone · doi:10.1016/s8756-3282(02)00950-x · Cited by 876
3D printing of bone tissue engineering scaffolds
Wang, C., Huang, W., Zhou, Y., He, L., He, Z., Chen, Z., He, X., Tian, S., Liao, J., Lu, B., et al. (2020) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.01.004 · Cited by 661
Direct-write bioprinting of cell-laden methacrylated gelatin hydrogels
Bertassoni, L. E., Cardoso, J. C., Manoharan, V., Cristino, A. L., Bhise, N. S., Araujo, W. A., Zorlutuna, P., Vrana, N. E., Ghaemmaghami, A. M., Dokmeci, M. R., et al. (2014) · Biofabrication · doi:10.1088/1758-5082/6/2/024105 · Cited by 642
Zhang, K., Fu, Q., Yoo, J., Chen, X., Chandra, P., Mo, X., Song, L., Atala, A., & Zhao, W. (2017) · Acta Biomaterialia · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2016.12.008 · Cited by 268
Cited by
Printability and shape fidelity of bioinks in 3D bioprinting
Schwab, A., Levato, R., D’Este, M., Piluso, S., Eglin, D., & Malda, J. (2020) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00084 · Cited by 1,359
3D printing of bone tissue engineering scaffolds
Wang, C., Huang, W., Zhou, Y., He, L., He, Z., Chen, Z., He, X., Tian, S., Liao, J., Lu, B., et al. (2020) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.01.004 · Cited by 661
Hydrogel Bioink Reinforcement for Additive Manufacturing: A Focused Review of Emerging Strategies
Chimene, D., Kaunas, R., & Gaharwar, A. K. (2020) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201902026 · Cited by 600
Deng, Z., Hu, T., Lei, Q., He, J., Ma, P. X., & Guo, B. (2019) · ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · doi:10.1021/acsami.8b20178 · Cited by 486
Recent Advances in Photo-Crosslinkable Hydrogels for Biomedical Applications
Choi, J. R., Yong, K. W., Choi, J. Y., & Cowie, A. C. (2019) · BioTechniques · doi:10.2144/btn-2018-0083 · Cited by 403
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhai, X., Ruan, C., Ma, Y., Cheng, D., Wu, M., Liu, W., Zhao, X., Pan, H., & Lu, W. W.
- Venue
- Advanced Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-11-24
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1700550-1700550
- ISSN
- 2198-3844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2769161313
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 7.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
