ArticleScientific reports2024
The impact of mechanical tuning on the printability of decellularized amniotic membrane bioinks for cell-laden bioprinting of soft tissue constructs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing the Bio-Instructive Placental Extracellular Matrix: Structural Properties, Decellularization, and Applications in Regenerative Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Amniotic Membrane-Derived Factors in Immunomodulation and Regenerative Medicine: Current Evidence and Emerging Perspectives in Biomaterials and 3D Bioprinting.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Bioinks in systems biology: integrating biomaterial design with cellular network modelling for predictive biofabrication.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM) bioinks hold significant potential in the 3D bioprinting of tissue-engineered constructs (TECs). While 3D bioprinting allows for the creation of custom-designed TECs, the development of bioinks based solely on dAM, without the inclusion of supporting agents or chemical modifications, remains underexplored. In this study, we present the concentration-dependent printability and rheological properties of dAM bioinks, along with an analysis of their in vitro cellular responses. Our findings demonstrate that increasing dAM concentrations, within the range of 1 to 3% w/v, enhances the mechanical moduli of the bioinks, enabling the 3D printing of flat structures with superior shape fidelity. In vitro assays reveal high cell viability across all dAM bioink formulations; however, at 3% w/v, the bioink tends to impede fibroblast proliferation, resulting in round cell morphology. We propose that bioinks containing 2% w/v dAM strike an optimal balance, providing fine-resolved features and a supportive microenvironment for fibroblasts, promoting elongated spindle-like morphology and enhanced proliferation. These results underscore the importance of dAM concentration in regulating the properties and performance of bioinks, particularly regarding cell viability and morphology, for the successful 3D bioprinting of soft tissues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.