Cited by 99Hydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Modular scaffolds assembled around living cells using poly(ethylene glycol) microspheres with macroporation via a non-cytotoxic porogen

Open access
Scott, Evan A., Nichols, Michael D., Kuntz-Willits, Rebecca, Elbert, Donald L.·2010·Acta Biomaterialia

Abstract

Modular, bioactive, macroporous scaffolds were formed by crosslinking poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) microspheres around living cells. Hydrogel microspheres were produced from reactive PEG derivatives in aqueous sodium sulfate solutions without the use of surfactants or copolymers. Microspheres were formed following thermally induced phase separation if the gel point was reached prior to extensive coarsening of the PEG-rich domains. Three types of PEG microspheres with different functionalities were used to form scaffolds: one type provided mechanical support, the second type provided controlled delivery of the angiogenesis-promoting molecule, sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) and the third type served as a slowly dissolving non-cytotoxic porogen. Scaffolds were formed by centrifuging microspheres in the presence of HepG2 hepatoma cells, resulting in a homogenous distribution of cells. During overnight incubation at 37 degrees C, the microspheres reacted with serum proteins in cell culture medium to stabilize the scaffolds. Within 2 days in culture, macropores formed due to the dissolution of the porogenic PEG microspheres, without affecting cell viability. Gradients in porosity were produced by varying the buoyancy of the porogenic microspheres. Conjugated RGD cell adhesion peptides and the delivery of S1P promoted endothelial cell infiltration through macropores in the scaffolds. The scaffolds presented here differ from previous hydrogel scaffolds in that: (i) cells are not encapsulated in hydrogel; (ii) macropores form in the presence of cells; and (iii) scaffold properties are controlled by the modular assembly of different microspheres that perform distinct functions.

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 · 10.1016/j.actbio.2009.07.009

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cells in the body perform bioactivities in response to stimulation from a highly complex, 3D microenvironment.

    “Cells in our body perform bioactivities in response to the stimulation from a highly complex, 3D microenvironment (15,98,112).”

    From Modeling physiological events in 2D vs. 3D cell culture (2017) · cites this paper as [98]

    The Results (Cell interactions with scaffolds; page unavailable) show that endothelial-cell infiltration responds to porosity, RGD peptide, and S1P delivery in three-dimensional engineered scaffolds. This supports the general idea that a cell’s surroundings influence its activity, but the paper does not establish the broader claim about cells throughout the body responding to a highly complex natural 3D microenvironment. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scott, E. A., Nichols, M. D., Kuntz-Willits, R., & Elbert, D. L.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Elbert, Donald L.
Venue
Acta Biomaterialia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
29-38
ISSN
1742-7061 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979503272
Cited by
99
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Biomaterialia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • American Heart Association
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL085364)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Hydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
macroporous scaffolds, thermally induced phase separation, hydrogel microspheres, sphingosine-1-phosphate, angiogenesis, porosity gradient, HepG2 cells, scaffold assembly
MeSH terms
Biocompatible Materials, Hot Temperature, Humans, Light, Lysophospholipids, Microspheres, Polyethylene Glycols, Polymers, Scattering, Radiation, Sphingosine, Sulfates, Surface-Active Agents, Temperature, Time Factors, Neovascularization, Physiologic, Hydrogels

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