Cited by 86Bone Tissue Engineering Materials3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Effect of pore size in bone regeneration using polydopamine‐laced hydroxyapatite collagen calcium silicate scaffolds fabricated by 3D mould printing technology

Open access
Lee, Dong Joon, Kwon, Jane, Kim, Yong‐Il, Wang, Xiaoyu, Wu, Te‐Ju, Lee, Yan‐Ting, Kim, Steven, Miguez, Patricia +1 more·2019·Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research

Abstract

Structured Abstract: Objective: The pore size of the scaffold is a critical factor in repairing large bone defect. Here, we investigated the potential of bone regeneration using novel nanocomposite polydopamine‐laced hydroxyapatite collagen calcium silicate ( HCCS ‐ PDA ) scaffolds with two different pore sizes, 250 and 500 μm. Samples/Setting: A total of 12 male Sprague‐Dawley rats were implanted with HCCS ‐ PDA scaffold with pore size of either 250 or 500 μm into surgically created critical‐sized defect ( CSD ). Methods: HCCS ‐ PDA scaffolds were fabricated using mould printing technique. The effect of pore size on mechanical strength of the scaffolds was assessed by compression testing. After seeding with rat mesenchymal stem cells ( rMSC s), the scaffolds were implanted, and new bone formation was evaluated using micro CT and histomorphometric analysis after 8 weeks. Results: Micro CT and histology analysis demonstrated restricted peripheral new bone formation in either dural or periosteal side and limited new bone formation in the 250 μm pore scaffold. Conversely, the 500‐μm pore scaffold showed more penetration of new bone into the scaffold and greater bone regeneration in the rat CSD . Conclusion: Based on our results, which demonstrated improved new bone formation in 500 μm pores scaffold, we can conclude that effective scaffold pore size that induces osteointegration and bone regeneration is around 500 μm for HCCS ‐ PDA nanocomposite scaffold.

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 · 10.1111/ocr.12261

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • The opposite charge on the outer and inner surface of HNTs makes them attractive for electrostatic bonding with polymers and drugs.

    “Also, the opposite charge on the outer and inner surface of HNTs makes them attractive for electrostatic bonding with polymers and drugs (Lee Y. J. et al., 2019; Zare and Rhee, 2021a).”

    From Osteogenesis Improvement of Gelatin-Based Nanocomposite Scaffold by Loading Zoledronic Acid (2022) · cites this paper as Lee Y. J. et al., 2019

    The Introduction and Methods describe polydopamine-laced hydroxyapatite collagen calcium silicate scaffolds, not HNTs. Searches for HNT surface charge and electrostatic bonding with polymers or drugs found no passage addressing the claim; page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Ko CC, Guez C, Lee DJ, Wang Z, Tseng H. Advances in Bioceramics and Biotechnologies II: Ceramic Transactions California: Wiley-American Ceramic Society; 2014 135– 148 p.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, D. J., Kwon, J., Kim, Y., Wang, X., Wu, T., Lee, Y., Kim, S., Miguez, P., & Ko, C.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences Research School of Dentistry University of North Carolina Chapel Hill North Carolina
Corresponding author
Ko, Ching‐Chang
Venue
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-05
Volume
22
Issue
S1
Pages
127-133
ISSN
  • 1601-6335 (ISSN-L)
  • 1601-6343
OpenAlex
W2943906508
Cited by
86
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (R01DE022816)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
bone regeneration, scaffold pore size, polydopamine, hydroxyapatite, collagen, calcium silicate, nanocomposite scaffolds, critical-size bone defect, mesenchymal stem cells, new bone formation, osseointegration, scaffold mechanical strength
MeSH terms
Animals, Bone Regeneration, Calcium, Collagen, Indoles, Male, Polymers, Porosity, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Calcium Compounds, Silicates, Durapatite, Tissue Engineering, Rats, Tissue Scaffolds, Printing, Three-Dimensional

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