Multicomponent gelatin-methacryloyl (GelMA) hydrogels are regularly adopted for cartilage tissue engineering (TE) applications, where optimizing chemical modifications for preserving biofunctionality is often overlooked. This study investigates the biological effect of two different modification methods, methacrylation and thiolation, to copolymerize GelMA and heparin. The native bioactivity of methacrylated heparin (HepMA) and thiolated heparin (HepSH) is evaluated via thromboplastin time and heparan sulfate-deficient myeloid cell-line proliferation assay, demonstrating that thiolation is superior for preserving anticoagulation and growth factor signaling capacity. Furthermore, incorporating either HepMA or HepSH in chondrocyte-laden GelMA hydrogels, cultured for 5 weeks under chondrogenic conditions, promotes cell viability and chondrocyte phenotype. However, only GelMA-HepSH hydrogels yield significantly greater differentiation and matrix deposition in vitro compared to GelMA. This study demonstrates that thiol-ene chemistry offers a favorable strategy for incorporating bioactives into gelatin hydrogels as compared to methacrylation while furthermore highlighting GelMA-HepSH hydrogels as candidates for cartilage TE applications.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 31 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,341,093
of 30,296,742 outputs
Outputs from Macromolecular Bioscience
#305
of 2,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,459
of 351,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Macromolecular Bioscience
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,296,742 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 351,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
