Liver Bioreactor Design Issues of Fluid Flow and Zonation, Fibrosis, and Mechanics: A Computational Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tissue engineering, with the goal of repairing or replacing damaged tissue and organs, has continued to make dramatic science-based advances since its origins in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Such advances are always multi-disciplinary in nature, from basic biology and chemistry through physics and mathematics to various engineering and computer fields. This review will focus its attention on two topics critical for tissue engineering liver development: (a) fluid flow, zonation, and drug screening, and (b) biomechanics, tissue stiffness, and fibrosis, all within the context of 3D structures. First, a general overview of various bioreactor designs developed to investigate fluid transport and tissue biomechanics is given. This includes a mention of computational fluid dynamic methods used to optimize and validate these designs. Thereafter, the perspective provided by computer simulations of flow, reactive transport, and biomechanics responses at the scale of the liver lobule and liver tissue is outlined, in addition to how bioreactor-measured properties can be utilized in these models. Here, the fundamental issues of tortuosity and upscaling are highlighted, as well as the role of disease and fibrosis in these issues. Some idealized simulations of the effects of fibrosis on lobule drug transport and mechanics responses are provided to further illustrate these concepts. This review concludes with an outline of some practical applications of tissue engineering advances and how efficient computational upscaling techniques, such as dual continuum modeling, might be used to quantify the transition of bioreactor results to the full liver scale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".