↓ Skip to main content

Designing of PLA scaffolds for bone tissue replacement fabricated by ordinary commercial 3D printer

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biological Engineering, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
599 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Designing of PLA scaffolds for bone tissue replacement fabricated by ordinary commercial 3D printer
Published in
Journal of Biological Engineering, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13036-017-0074-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aleš Gregor, Eva Filová, Martin Novák, Jakub Kronek, Hynek Chlup, Matěj Buzgo, Veronika Blahnová, Věra Lukášová, Martin Bartoš, Alois Nečas, Jan Hošek

Abstract

The primary objective of Tissue engineering is a regeneration or replacement of tissues or organs damaged by disease, injury, or congenital anomalies. At present, Tissue engineering repairs damaged tissues and organs with artificial supporting structures called scaffolds. These are used for attachment and subsequent growth of appropriate cells. During the cell growth gradual biodegradation of the scaffold occurs and the final product is a new tissue with the desired shape and properties. In recent years, research workplaces are focused on developing scaffold by bio-fabrication techniques to achieve fast, precise and cheap automatic manufacturing of these structures. Most promising techniques seem to be Rapid prototyping due to its high level of precision and controlling. However, this technique is still to solve various issues before it is easily used for scaffold fabrication. In this article we tested printing of clinically applicable scaffolds with use of commercially available devices and materials. Research presented in this article is in general focused on "scaffolding" on a field of bone tissue replacement. Commercially available 3D printer and Polylactic acid were used to create originally designed and possibly suitable scaffold structures for bone tissue engineering. We tested printing of scaffolds with different geometrical structures. Based on the osteosarcoma cells proliferation experiment and mechanical testing of designed scaffold samples, it will be stated that it is likely not necessary to keep the recommended porosity of the scaffold for bone tissue replacement at about 90%, and it will also be clarified why this fact eliminates mechanical properties issue. Moreover, it is demonstrated that the size of an individual pore could be double the size of the recommended range between 0.2-0.35 mm without affecting the cell proliferation. Rapid prototyping technique based on Fused deposition modelling was used for the fabrication of designed scaffold structures. All the experiments were performed in order to show how to possibly solve certain limitations and issues that are currently reported by research workplaces on the field of scaffold bio-fabrication. These results should provide new valuable knowledge for further research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 599 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 599 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 97 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 83 14%
Student > Bachelor 75 13%
Researcher 48 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 32 5%
Other 71 12%
Unknown 193 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 154 26%
Materials Science 66 11%
Chemistry 30 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 4%
Other 80 13%
Unknown 222 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,880,010
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biological Engineering
#163
of 265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,439
of 325,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biological Engineering
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.