The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Importance of New Processing Techniques in Tissue Engineering
Abstract
Tissue engineering offers the possibility to create completely natural tissue and replace failing or malfunctioning organs. In many cases, biocompatible, biodegradable polymers are utilized to either induce surrounding tissue and cell ingrowth or to serve as a temporary scaffold for transplanted cells to attach, grow, and maintain differentiated functions. Various processing techniques have therefore been developed to fabricate polymers with specific properties to meet the needs of a particular organ. Polymer scaffolds must possess unique physical and chemical properties for specific applications and must satisfy some basic requirements for tissue engineering. These scaffolds may be implanted without cells, and the regeneration depends on ingrowth of surrounding tissue to such materials—a process known as tissue induction. Alternatively cells may be seeded into a porous polymer. The cell-polymer construct is then transplanted. In either case, one essential criterion for the scaffold is biocompatibility—that is, the polymer scaffolds and their degradation products should not invoke an adverse immune response or toxicity. Because of the problems associated with long-term implants, such as infection, fibrous tissue formation, and the possible need for retrieval, the role of polymer scaffolds should only be a temporary one. The degradation rate is optimized to allow transplanted cells to proliferate and secrete their own extracellular matrix (ECM) while polymer scaffolds can vanish when necessary to leave enough space for new tissue growth. Biodegradability of a polymer is determined by its composition, molecular weight (MW), MW distribution, degree of crystallinity, and environmental conditions such as temperature and pH. Mechanical loading of the scaffold may affect its degradation.
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
Biomaterials in Tissue Engineering
Hubbell, J. A. (1995) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0695-565 · Cited by 1,060
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
Unconventional Methods for Fabricating and Patterning Nanostructures
Xia, Y., Rogers, J. A., Paul, K. E., & Whitesides, G. M. (1999) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr980002q · Cited by 1,538
Three-Dimensional Cell Culture Matrices: State of the Art
Lee, J., Cuddihy, M. J., & Kotov, N. A. (2008) · Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews · doi:10.1089/teb.2007.0150 · Cited by 1,047
Biomechanics of cellular solids
Gibson, L. J. (2005) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.09.027 · Cited by 961
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-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lu, L., & Mikos, A. G.
- Venue
- MRS Bulletin
- Published
- 1996-11
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 28-32
- ISSN
- 0883-7694 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-1425
- OpenAlex
- W1820872281
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.09
- 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: The Importance of New Processing Techniques in Tissue Engineering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1557/s088376940003181x
- The paper
- Lu, L., & Mikos, A. G. (1996). The Importance of New Processing Techniques in Tissue Engineering. MRS Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1557/s088376940003181x
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.