Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mechanical properties and in vivo behavior of a biodegradable synthetic polymer microfiber–extracellular matrix hydrogel biohybrid scaffold

Open access
Hong, Yi, Huber, Alexander, Takanari, Keisuke, Amoroso, Nicholas J., Hashizume, Ryotaro, Badylak, Stephen F., Wagner, William R.·2011·Biomaterials

Abstract

A biohybrid composite consisting of extracellular matrix (ECM) gel from porcine dermal tissue and biodegradable elastomeric fibers was generated and evaluated for soft tissue applications. ECM gel possesses attractive biocompatibility and bioactivity with weak mechanical properties and rapid degradation, while electrospun biodegradable poly(ester urethane)urea (PEUU) has good mechanical properties but limited cellular infiltration and tissue integration. A concurrent gel electrospray/polymer electrospinning method was employed to create ECM gel/PEUU fiber composites with attractive mechanical properties, including high flexibility and strength. Electron microscopy revealed a structure of interconnected fibrous layers embedded in ECM gel. Tensile mechanical properties could be tuned by altering the PEUU/ECM weight ratio. Scaffold tensile strengths for PEUU/ECM ratios of 67/33, 72/28 and 80/20 ranged from 80–187 kPa in the longitudinal axis (parallel to the collecting mandrel axis) and 41–91 kPa in the circumferential axis with 645–938% breaking strains. The 72/28 biohybrid composite and a control scaffold generated from electrospun PEUU alone were implanted into Lewis rats, replacing a full-thickness abdominal wall defect. At 4 wk, no infection or herniation was found at the implant site. Histological staining showed extensive cellular infiltration into the biohybrid scaffold with the newly developed tissue well integrated with the native periphery, while minimal cellular ingress into the electrospun PEUU scaffold was observed. Mechanical testing of explanted constructs showed evidence of substantial remodeling, with composite scaffolds adopting properties more comparable to the native abdominal wall. The described elastic biohybrid material imparts features of ECM gel bioactivity with PEUU strength and handling to provide a promising composite biomaterial for soft tissue repair and replacement.

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 · 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.025

Cites

3 of 3 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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
Hong, Y., Huber, A., Takanari, K., Amoroso, N. J., Hashizume, R., Badylak, S. F., & Wagner, W. R.
Venue
Biomaterials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-05
Volume
32
Issue
13
Pages
3387-3394
ISSN
0142-9612 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996914913
Cited by
217
References
3
FWCI
5.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mechanical properties and in vivo behavior of a biodegradable synthetic polymer microfiber–extracellular matrix hydrogel biohybrid scaffold. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.025
The paper
Hong, Y., Huber, A., Takanari, K., Amoroso, N. J., Hashizume, R., Badylak, S. F., & Wagner, W. R. (2011). Mechanical properties and in vivo behavior of a biodegradable synthetic polymer microfiber–extracellular matrix hydrogel biohybrid scaffold. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.025

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.