Bioprinting of human nasoseptal chondrocytes‐laden collagen hydrogel for cartilage tissue engineering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skin cancer patients often have tumorigenic lesions on their noses. Surgical resection of the lesions often results in nasal cartilage removal. Cartilage grafts taken from other anatomical sites are used for the surgical reconstruction of the nasal cartilage, but donor-site morbidity is a common problem. Autologous tissue-engineered nasal cartilage grafts can mitigate the problem, but commercially available scaffolds define the shape and sizes of the engineered grafts during tissue fabrication. Moreover, the engineered grafts suffer from the inhomogeneous distribution of the functional matrix of cartilage. Advances in 3D bioprinting technology offer the opportunity to engineer cartilages with customizable dimensions and anatomically shaped configurations without the inhomogeneous distribution of cartilage matrix. Here, we report the fidelity of Freeform Reversible Embedding of Suspended Hydrogel (FRESH) bioprinting as a strategy to generate customizable and homogenously distributed functional cartilage matrix engineered nasal cartilage. Using FRESH and in vitro chondrogenesis, we have fabricated tissue-engineered nasal cartilage from combining bovine type I collagen hydrogel and human nasoseptal chondrocytes. The engineered nasal cartilage constructs displayed molecular, biochemical and histological characteristics akin to native human nasal cartilage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".