Cited by 6413D Printing in Biomedical ResearchTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineHydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications

Microfabrication of complex porous tissue engineering scaffolds using 3D projection stereolithography

Open access
Gauvin, Robert, Chen, Ying-Chieh, Lee, Jin Woo, Soman, Pranav, Zorlutuna, Pinar, Nichol, Jason W., Bae, Hojae, Chen, Shaochen +1 more·2012·Biomaterials

Abstract

The success of tissue engineering will rely on the ability to generate complex, cell seeded three-dimensional (3D) structures. Therefore, methods that can be used to precisely engineer the architecture and topography of scaffolding materials will represent a critical aspect of functional tissue engineering. Previous approaches for 3D scaffold fabrication based on top-down and process driven methods are often not adequate to produce complex structures due to the lack of control on scaffold architecture, porosity, and cellular interactions. The proposed projection stereolithography (PSL) platform can be used to design intricate 3D tissue scaffolds that can be engineered to mimic the microarchitecture of tissues, based on computer aided design (CAD). The PSL system was developed, programmed and optimized to fabricate 3D scaffolds using gelatin methacrylate (GelMA). Variation of the structure and prepolymer concentration enabled tailoring the mechanical properties of the scaffolds. A dynamic cell seeding method was utilized to improve the coverage of the scaffold throughout its thickness. The results demonstrated that the interconnectivity of pores allowed for uniform human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) distribution and proliferation in the scaffolds, leading to high cell density and confluency at the end of the culture period. Moreover, immunohistochemistry results showed that cells seeded on the scaffold maintained their endothelial phenotype, demonstrating the biological functionality of the microfabricated GelMA scaffolds.

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.2012.01.048

Cites

66 of 66 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?

  • Increasing the dimensionality of extracellular matrix around cells from 2D to 3D can significantly impact cell proliferation, differentiation, mechano-responses, and survival.

    “Results from 3D studies demonstrate that increasing the dimensionality of extracellular matrix (ECM) around cells from 2D to 3D can significantly impact cell proliferation, differentiation, mechano-responses, and cell survival (2,10,41).”

    From Modeling physiological events in 2D vs. 3D cell culture (2017) · cites this paper as [41]

    The Results (§3.3; page unavailable) show that cells remained viable and proliferated on the 3D GelMA scaffolds. The Introduction (§1) discusses scaffold cues affecting differentiation, but the paper does not establish that changing the ECM from 2D to 3D significantly changes all four listed outcomes; its mechanical measurements concern the scaffolds, not cellular mechano-responses. (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

2 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gauvin, R., Chen, Y.-C., Lee, J. W., Soman, P., Zorlutuna, P., Nichol, J. W., Bae, H., Chen, S., & Khademhosseini, A.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
  • Chen, Ying-Chieh
  • Chen, Shaochen
  • Khademhosseini, Ali
Venue
Biomaterials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-05
Volume
33
Issue
15
Pages
3824-3834
ISSN
0142-9612 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164279637
Cited by
641
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 66 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 10
FWCI
22.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biomaterials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (HL099073, EB012597, HL092836)
  • Fonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
  • National Science Foundation (DMR0847287)
  • Office of Naval Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Hydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications
Keywords
projection stereolithography, tissue engineering scaffolds, gelatin methacryloyl, 3D microfabrication, porous scaffolds, scaffold porosity, human umbilical vein endothelial cells, endothelial phenotype, scaffold mechanical properties, scaffold architecture
MeSH terms
Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Humans, Porosity, Microscopy, Confocal, Tissue Engineering, Green Fluorescent Proteins, Tissue Scaffolds, Microtechnology, Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial 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