↓ Skip to main content

Layer-by-layer bioassembly of cellularized polylactic acid porous membranes for bone tissue engineering

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Layer-by-layer bioassembly of cellularized polylactic acid porous membranes for bone tissue engineering
Published in
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10856-017-5887-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vera Guduric, Carole Metz, Robin Siadous, Reine Bareille, Riccardo Levato, Elisabeth Engel, Jean-Christophe Fricain, Raphaël Devillard, Ognjan Luzanin, Sylvain Catros

Abstract

The conventional tissue engineering is based on seeding of macroporous scaffold on its surface ("top-down" approach). The main limitation is poor cell viability in the middle of the scaffold due to poor diffusion of oxygen and nutrients and insufficient vascularization. Layer-by-Layer (LBL) bioassembly is based on "bottom-up" approach, which considers assembly of small cellularized blocks. The aim of this work was to evaluate proliferation and differentiation of human bone marrow stromal cells (HBMSCs) and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) in two and three dimensions (2D, 3D) using a LBL assembly of polylactic acid (PLA) scaffolds fabricated by 3D printing. 2D experiments have shown maintain of cell viability on PLA, especially when a co-cuture system was used, as well as adequate morphology of seeded cells. Early osteoblastic and endothelial differentiations were observed and cell proliferation was increased after 7 days of culture. In 3D, cell migration was observed between layers of LBL constructs, as well as an osteoblastic differentiation. These results indicate that LBL assembly of PLA layers could be suitable for BTE, in order to promote homogenous cell distribution inside the scaffold and gene expression specific to the cells implanted in the case of co-culture system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 23%
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 14 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Materials Science 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 21 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 July 2017.
All research outputs
#19,945,393
of 25,383,278 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
#1,242
of 1,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,955
of 311,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,278 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,473 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 311,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.