Cited by 196Bone Tissue Engineering MaterialsSilk-based biomaterials and applicationsTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Relationships between degradability of silk scaffolds and osteogenesis

Open access
Park, Sang-Hyug, Gil, Eun Seok, Shi, Hai, Kim, Hyeon Joo, Lee, Kyongbum, Kaplan, David L.·2010·Biomaterials

Abstract

Bone repairs represent a major focus in orthopedic medicine with biomaterials as a critical aspect of the regenerative process. However, only a limited set of biomaterials are utilized today and few studies relate biomaterial scaffold design to degradation rate and new bone formation. Matching biomaterial remodeling rate towards new bone formation is important in terms of the overall rate and quality of bone regeneration outcomes. We report on the osteogenesis and metabolism of human bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) in 3D silk scaffolds. The scaffolds were prepared with two different degradation rates in order to study relationships between matrix degradation, cell metabolism and bone tissue formation in vitro. SEM, histology, chemical assays, real-time PCR and metabolic analyses were assessed to investigate these relationships. More extensively mineralized ECM formed in the scaffolds designed to degrade more rapidly, based on SEM, von Kossa and type I collagen staining and calcium content. Measures of osteogenic ECM were significantly higher in the more rapidly degrading scaffolds than in the more slowly degrading scaffolds over 56 days of study in vitro. Metabolic analysis, including glucose and lactate levels, confirmed the degradation rate differences with the two types of scaffolds, with the more rapidly degrading scaffolds supporting higher levels of glucose consumption and lactate synthesis by the hMSCs upon osteogenesis, in comparison to the more slowly degrading scaffolds. The results demonstrate that scaffold degradation rates directly impact the metabolism of hMSCs, and in turn the rate of osteogenesis. An understanding of the interplay between cellular metabolism and scaffold degradability should aid in the more rational design of scaffolds for bone regeneration needs both in vitro and in vivo.

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.biomaterials.2010.04.028

Cites

78 of 78 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?

  • Silk fibroin hydrolysates can enhance alkaline phosphatase activity in osteoblasts and their ability to undergo osteogenic differentiation.

    “Moreover, the study also found that silk fibroin hydrolysates can enhance the activity of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) in osteoblasts and their ability to undergo osteogenic differentiation [33].”

    From Recent Advances in Silk Fibroin-Based Composites for Bone Repair Applications: A Review (2025) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Discussion reports that faster-degrading silk scaffolds promoted osteogenic differentiation, and the Gene expression results report higher ALP transcripts in those scaffolds. The study examined cells grown on scaffolds, not treatment with silk fibroin hydrolysates. Its Biochemical analysis does not report enhanced ALP activity; activity decreased from day 16 to day 56 in both scaffold groups. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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
Park, S.-H., Gil, E. S., Shi, H., Kim, H. J., Lee, K., & Kaplan, D. L.
Affiliations
Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Kaplan, David L.
Venue
Biomaterials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08
Volume
31
Issue
24
Pages
6162-6172
ISSN
0142-9612 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977959012
Cited by
196
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 11
FWCI
7.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biomaterials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (KRF-2007-357-D00296)
  • National Institutes of Health (EB002520, EB003210P41)
  • National Research Foundation of Korea
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Silk-based biomaterials and applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
silk scaffolds, scaffold degradation rate, bone formation, bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, bone regeneration, cellular metabolism, glucose utilization, lactic acid production, extracellular matrix mineralization, type I collagen
MeSH terms
Adult, Amino Acids, Cell Differentiation, Cells, Cultured, Culture Media, Gene Expression Regulation, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Male, Models, Biological, Osteogenesis, RNA, Messenger, Biomarkers, Silk, Tissue Scaffolds, Mesenchymal Stem Cells

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