Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 708

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biomimetic 3D-printed scaffolds for spinal cord injury repair

Open access
Koffler, Jacob, Zhu, Wei, Qu, Xin, Platoshyn, Oleksandr, Dulin, Jennifer N., Brock, John, Graham, Lori, Lu, Paul, Sakamoto, Jeff, Marsala, Martin, Chen, Shaochen, Tuszynski, Mark H.·2019·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Current methods for bioprinting functional tissue lack appropriate biofabrication techniques to build complex 3D microarchitectures essential for guiding cell growth and promoting tissue maturation1. 3D printing of central nervous system (CNS) structures has not been accomplished, possibly owing to the complexity of CNS architecture. Here, we report the use of a microscale continuous projection printing method (μCPP) to create a complex CNS structure for regenerative medicine applications in the spinal cord. μCPP can print 3D biomimetic hydrogel scaffolds tailored to the dimensions of the rodent spinal cord in 1.6 s and is scalable to human spinal cord sizes and lesion geometries. We tested the ability of µCPP 3D-printed scaffolds loaded with neural progenitor cells (NPCs) to support axon regeneration and form new ‘neural relays’ across sites of complete spinal cord injury in vivo in rodents1,2. We find that injured host axons regenerate into 3D biomimetic scaffolds and synapse onto NPCs implanted into the device and that implanted NPCs in turn extend axons out of the scaffold and into the host spinal cord below the injury to restore synaptic transmission and significantly improve functional outcomes. Thus, 3D biomimetic scaffolds offer a means of enhancing CNS regeneration through precision medicine. Fast scalable 3D bioprinting generates biocompatible and biomimetic scaffolds to precisely fit the geometries of spinal cord lesions, promote axonal regeneration, and support stem cell grafts to promote recovery from spinal cord injury in rodents.

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 · 10.1038/s41591-018-0296-z

Cites

35 of 35 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 35 references

Cited by

See all 708

Metadata

Authors
Koffler, J., Zhu, W., Qu, X., Platoshyn, O., Dulin, J. N., Brock, J., Graham, L., Lu, P., Sakamoto, J., Marsala, M., Chen, S., & Tuszynski, M. H.
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2019-01-14
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
263-269
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W2908359749
Cited by
708
References
35
FWCI
28.86
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: Biomimetic 3D-printed scaffolds for spinal cord injury repair. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41591-018-0296-z
The paper
Koffler, J., Zhu, W., Qu, X., Platoshyn, O., Dulin, J. N., Brock, J., Graham, L., Lu, P., Sakamoto, J., Marsala, M., Chen, S., & Tuszynski, M. H. (2019). Biomimetic 3D-printed scaffolds for spinal cord injury repair. Nature Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0296-z

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.