The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Cellulose and Collagen Derived Micro-Nano Structured Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering
Abstract
Scaffold based bone tissue engineering (BTE) has made great progress in regenerating lost bone tissue. Materials of natural and synthetic origin have been used for scaffold fabrication. Scaffolds derived from natural polymers offer greater bioactivity and biocompatibility with mammalian tissues to favor tissue healing, due to their similarity to native extracellular matrix (ECM) components. Often it is a challenge to fabricate natural polymer based scaffolds for BTE applications without compromising their bioactivity, while maintaining adequate mechanical properties. In this work, we report the fabrication and characterization of cellulose and collagen based micro-nano structured scaffolds using human osteoblasts (HOB) for BTE applications. These porous micro-nano structured scaffolds (average pore diameter 190 +/- 10 microm) exhibited mechanical properties in the mid range of human trabecular bone (compressive modulus 266.75 +/- 33.22 MPa and strength 12.15 3 +/- 2.23 MPa). These scaffolds supported the greater adhesion and phenotype maintenance of cultured HOB as reflected by higher levels of osteogenic enzyme alkaline phosphatase and mineral deposition compared to control polyester micro-nano structured scaffolds of identical pore properties. These natural polymer based micro-nano structured scaffolds may serve as alternatives to polyester based scaffolds for BTE applications.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Even though synthetic polymers that are prepared with desired elasticity and molecular weight display promising results, they are found prone to acidic degradation that leads to the liberation of products that harm the tissue healing process [14].”
From Nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen composite as scaffold material for bone regeneration. (2023) · cites this paper as [14]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
3D bioactive composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering
Turnbull, G. S., Clarke, J., Picard, F., Riches, P. E., Jia, L., Han, F., Li, B., & Shu, W. (2017) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.10.001 · Cited by 1,388
“As part of the normal ECM it is inherently biocompatible, biodegradable and can stimulate cell proliferation and differentiation [205,206].”
BackgroundBone regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, and future directions
Oryan, A., Alidadi, S., Moshiri, A., & Maffulli, N. (2014) · Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research · doi:10.1186/1749-799x-9-18 · Cited by 1,294
Scaffold Design for Bone Regeneration
Polo-Corrales, L., Latorre‐Esteves, M., & Ramı́rez-Vick, J. E. (2014) · Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · doi:10.1166/jnn.2014.9127 · Cited by 969
Recent advances in nanocellulose for biomedical applications
Jorfi, M., & Foster, E. J. (2014) · Journal of Applied Polymer Science · doi:10.1002/app.41719 · Cited by 737
Fernández, M., Abbah, S. A., McNamara, L. M., Zeugolis, D. I., Pandit, A. S., & Biggs, M. J. P. (2014) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2014.09.005 · Cited by 524
“Studies with these next generation scaffolds indicate that they can be utilized to produce hierarchical bone scaffolds [250], and are effective delivery vectors for targeted drug delivery [251–255] with controlled drug release profiles, such as immediate, smooth, pulsatile, delayed, and biphasic releases [256,257].”
Metadata
- Authors
- Aravamudhan, A., Ramos, D. M., Nip, J., Harmon, M. D., James, R., Deng, M., Laurencin, C. T., Yu, X., & Kumbar, S. G.
- Affiliations
- UConn Health (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Biomedical Nanotechnology
- Publisher
- American Scientific Publishers
- Published
- 2013-04-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 719-731
- ISSN
- 1550-7033 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1967212772
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 7.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Biomedical Nanotechnology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
- Keywords
- bone tissue engineering, cellulose, collagen, human osteoblasts, osteogenic differentiation, alkaline phosphatase, mineral deposition, porous scaffolds, compressive modulus, extracellular matrix mimicry
- MeSH terms
- Alkaline Phosphatase, Bone and Bones, Cell Survival, Cells, Cultured, Cellulose, Collagen, Humans, Microspheres, Minerals, Osteoblasts, Particle Size, Solvents, Porosity, Compressive Strength, Tissue Engineering, Cell Proliferation, Tissue Scaffolds, Nanofibers
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
