The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fabrication of biodegradable polymer scaffolds to engineer trabecular bone
Abstract
We present a novel method for manufacturing three-dimensional, biodegradable poly(DL-lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) foam scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. The technique involves the formation of a composite material consisting of gelatin microspheres surrounded by a PLGA matrix. The gelatin microspheres are leached out leaving an open-cell foam with a pore size and morphology defined by the gelatin microspheres. The foam porosity can be controlled by altering the volume fraction of gelatin used to make the composite material. PLGA 50:50 was used as a model degradable polymer to establish the effect of porosity, pore size, and degradation on foam mechanical properties. The yield strengths and moduli in compression of PLGA 50:50 foams were found to decrease with increasing porosity according to power law relationships. These mechanical properties were however, largely unaffected by pore size. Foams with yield strengths up to 3.2 MPa were manufactured. From in vitro degradation studies we established that for PLGA 50:50 foams the mechanical properties declined in parallel with the decrease in molecular weight. Below a weight average molecular weight of 10,000 the foam had very little mechanical strength (0.02 MPa). These results indicate that PLGA 50:50 foams are not suitable for replacement of trabecular bone. However, the dependence of mechanical properties on porosity, pore size, and degree of degradation which we have determined will aid us in designing a biodegradable scaffold suitable for bone regeneration.
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
Cites
Miller, R. A., Brady, J. M., & Cutright, D. E. (1977) · Journal of Biomedical Materials Research · doi:10.1002/jbm.820110507 · Cited by 722
Cited by
The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. Part I. Traditional factors
Yang, S., Leong, K.-F., Du, Z., & Chua, C.-K. (2001) · Tissue Engineering · doi:10.1089/107632701753337645 · Cited by 2,234
Biodegradable synthetic polymers for tissue engineering
CSIRO Molecular Science, B. 1., & Gunatillake, P. (2003) · European Cells and Materials · doi:10.22203/ecm.v005a01 · Cited by 1,765
In vitro and in vivo degradation of porous poly(dl-lactic-co-glycolic acid) foams
Lu, L., Peter, S. J., D. Lyman, M., Lai, H.-L., Leite, S. M., Tamada, J. A., Uyama, S., Vacanti, J. P., Langer, R., & Mikos, A. G. (2000) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/s0142-9612(00)00047-8 · Cited by 668
Self-citationHost response to tissue engineered devices
Babensee, J. E., Anderson, J. M., McIntire, L. V., & Mikos, A. G. (1998) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(98)00023-4 · Cited by 585
Self-citationBioactive polymeric scaffolds for tissue engineering
Stratton, S., Shelke, N. B., Hoshino, K., Rudraiah, S., & Kumbar, S. G. (2016) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2016.11.001 · Cited by 469
Metadata
- Authors
- Thomson, R. C., Yaszemski, M. J., Powers, J. M., & Mikos, A. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1996-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-38
- ISSN
- 0920-5063 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-5624
- OpenAlex
- W1980302953
- Cited by
- 493
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.15
- 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: Fabrication of biodegradable polymer scaffolds to engineer trabecular bone. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156856295x00805
- The paper
- Thomson, R. C., Yaszemski, M. J., Powers, J. M., & Mikos, A. G. (1996). Fabrication of biodegradable polymer scaffolds to engineer trabecular bone. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856295x00805
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.