Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41021749›Full record

ArticleACS applied bio materials2025

Mimicking Design Scaffolds Based on Nonwoven Biological Materials of Silk Cocoon for Soft Tissue Engineering at the Bone Interfacial Area: Structure, Morphology, and Performance Evaluation Based on In Vitro Testing, and Identification of Applied Biomaterials.

Jutakan Thonglam, Thongchai Nuntanaranont, Xiangdong Kong, Jirut Meesane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS applied bio materials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jutakan ThonglamInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Biomedical Science and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.
Thongchai NuntanaranontDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.
Xiangdong KongInstitute of Smart Biomedical Materials, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 310018, China.
Jirut MeesaneInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Biomedical Science and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-6242-818X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The malformation of soft tissue engineering at the bone interfacial area is a critical problem for surgery. Mimicking design scaffolds based on nonwoven biological materials were created for soft tissue engineering at the bone interfacial area. Silk cocoons were cut into small pieces before degradation by lysozyme at 0 (untreated), 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks (Mimic-SC0, Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4, respectively). The molecular structure of degraded silk cocoons was characterized using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry. The morphology was examined using scanning electron microscopy. Wettability was tested using the contact angle, while the mechanical properties were tested using the mode of tensile force. The silk cocoons were cultured with L929 fibroblasts and MC3T3-E1 osteoblast cells. Fibroblast response was tested with cell proliferation and attachment, H&E staining, and Masson staining. Osteoblast response was tested with cell proliferation and attachment, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, and osteocalcin (OCN). Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4 showed amide I mobility and low regular structural formation. All samples showed multilayered fibrous structures with dense inner and loose outer zones. Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4 had fibers of smaller size than Mimic-SC0. Mimic-SC3 and Mimic-SC4 showed higher wettability than the others. Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4 exhibited higher toughness and flexibility than Mimic-SC0. Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4 exhibited better fibroblast cell adhesion along with higher proliferation than Mimic-SC0. All samples showed cell migration into the deeper layer on day 10. Mimic-SC4 had cell adhesion with continuous regular alignment and dense organization on its surface. Mimic-SC4 exhibited collagen accumulation connected to the layer of cell adhesion. Mimic-SC1, Mimic-SC2, Mimic-SC3, and Mimic-SC4 exhibited higher osteoblast proliferation, ALP activity, and OCN levels than Mimic-SC0. Our research deduced that Mimic-SC4 shows promise in soft tissue engineering at the bone interfacial area.

Indexed as

Biocompatible MaterialsBiomimetic MaterialsSilkTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsAnimalsBombyxBone and BonesCell AdhesionCell LineCell ProliferationFibroblastsMaterials TestingMiceOsteoblastsParticle SizeBiocompatible MaterialsSilkbone augmentationmembranessilk cocoontissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID41021749
PMCPMC12541696

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.