The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Scaffolds for Engineering Smooth Muscle Under Cyclic Mechanical Strain Conditions
Abstract
Cyclic mechanical strain has been demonstrated to enhance the development and function of engineered smooth muscle (SM) tissues, but appropriate scaffolds for engineering tissues under conditions of cyclic strain are currently lacking. These scaffolds must display elastic behavior, and be capable of inducing an appropriate smooth muscle cell (SMC) phenotype in response to mechanical signals. In this study, we have characterized several scaffold types commonly utilized in tissue engineering applications in order to select scaffolds that exhibit elastic properties under appropriate cyclic strain conditions. The ability of the scaffolds to promote an appropriate SMC phenotype in engineered SM tissues under cyclic strain conditions was subsequently analyzed. Poly(L-lactic acid)-bonded polyglycolide fiber-based scaffolds and type I collagen sponges exhibited partially elastic mechanical properties under cyclic strain conditions, although the synthetic polymer scaffolds demonstrated significant permanent deformation after extended times of cyclic strain application. SM tissues engineered with type I collagen sponges subjected to cyclic strain were found to contain more elastin than control tissues, and the SMCs in these tissues exhibited a contractile phenotype. In contrast, SMCs in control tissues exhibited a structure more consistent with the nondifferentiated, synthetic phenotype. These studies indicate the appropriate choice of a scaffold for engineering tissues in a mechanically dynamic environment is dependent on the time frame of the mechanical stimulation, and elastic scaffolds allow for mechanically directed control of cell phenotype in engineered tissues. [S0148-0731(00)00103-5]
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The return of a forgotten polymer—Polycaprolactone in the 21st century
Woodruff, M. A., & Hutmacher, D. W. (2010) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.04.002 · Cited by 4,033
Li, M., Mondrinos, M. J., Chen, X., Gandhi, M. R., Ko, F. K., & Lelkes, P. I. (2006) · Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A · doi:10.1002/jbm.a.30833 · Cited by 358
Molecular basis of the effects of mechanical stretch on vascular smooth muscle cells
Haga, J. H., Li, Y.-S. J., & Chien, S. (2007) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.04.011 · Cited by 342
Synergistic Action of Growth Factors and Dynamic Loading for Articular Cartilage Tissue Engineering
Mauck, R. L., Nicoll, S. B., Seyhan, S. L., Ateshian, G. A., & Hung, C. T. (2003) · Tissue Engineering · doi:10.1089/107632703768247304 · Cited by 337
Bioengineering Challenges for Heart Valve Tissue Engineering
Sacks, M. S., Schoen, F. J., & Mayer, J. E. (2009) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-061008-124903 · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, B.-S., & Mooney, D. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
- Publisher
- ASME International
- Published
- 2000-02-06
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 210-215
- ISSN
- 0148-0731 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-8951
- OpenAlex
- W2129360703
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Scaffolds for Engineering Smooth Muscle Under Cyclic Mechanical Strain Conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1115/1.429651
- The paper
- Kim, B.-S., & Mooney, D. J. (2000). Scaffolds for Engineering Smooth Muscle Under Cyclic Mechanical Strain Conditions. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.429651
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.