Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Engineering cartilage‐like tissue using human mesenchymal stem cells and silk protein scaffolds

Meinel, Lorenz, Hofmann, Sandra, Karageorgiou, Vassilis, Zichner, Ludwig, Langer, Robert, Kaplan, David, Vunjak‐Novakovic, Gordana·2004·Biotechnology and Bioengineering
DOI 10.1002/bit.20252
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSC) derived from bone marrow aspirates can form the basis for the in vitro cultivation of autologous tissue grafts and help alleviate the problems of immunorejection and disease transmission associated with the use of allografts. We explored the utility of hMSC cultured on protein scaffolds for tissue engineering of cartilage. hMSC were isolated, expanded in culture, characterized with respect to the expression of surface markers and ability for chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation, and seeded on scaffolds. Four different scaffolds were tested, formed as a highly porous sponge made of: 1) collagen, 2) cross‐linked collagen, 3) silk, and 4) RGD‐coupled silk. Cell‐seeded scaffolds were cultured for up to 4 weeks in either control medium (DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum) or chondrogenic medium (control medium supplemented with chondrogenic factors). hMSC attachment, proliferation, and metabolic activity were markedly better on slowly degrading silk than on fast‐degrading collagen scaffolds. In chondrogenic medium, hMSC formed cartilaginous tissues on all scaffolds, but the extent of chondrogenesis was substantially higher for hMSC cultured on silk as compared to collagen scaffolds. The deposition of glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and type II collagen and the expression of type II collagen mRNA were all higher for hMSC cultured on silk than on collagen scaffolds. Taken together, these results suggest that silk scaffolds are particularly suitable for tissue engineering of cartilage starting from hMSC, presumably due to their high porosity, slow biodegradation, and structural integrity. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bit.20252

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 310

Metadata

Authors
Meinel, L., Hofmann, S., Karageorgiou, V., Zichner, L., Langer, R., Kaplan, D., & Vunjak‐Novakovic, G.
Venue
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-10-14
Volume
88
Issue
3
Pages
379-391
ISSN
  • 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0290
DOI
10.1002/bit.20252
OpenAlex
W2045830393
Cited by
310
References
47
FWCI
12.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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.