Simple Fabrication and Enhanced Bioactivity of Bioglass‐Poly(lactic‐co‐glycolic acid) Composite Scaffolds with Matrix Microporosity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Scaffold porosity plays an important role in bone tissue engineering as macropores promote cell migration and micropores promote protein adsorption and cell adhesion. Currently, most methods use complex, multi‐step processes to create dual‐scale porosity in composite scaffolds, and no studies evaluate the effect of microporosity on the bioactivity of composite scaffolds with dual porosity. To fill this gap, a simple solvent casting and porogen leaching technique using paraffin microspheres as a porogen and CitriSolv as the leaching solvent to prepare macroporous Bioglass‐poly(lactic‐co‐glycolic acid) (Bg‐PLGA) scaffolds with intrinsic micropores (1–10 µm) in the PLGA matrix is proposed, and the effect of microporosity on the bioactivity of the scaffolds is analyzed. PLGA matrix microporosity induces larger apatite deposition upon immersion in simulated body fluid, as well as enhanced protein adsorption upon contact with serum, compared to non‐microporous scaffolds. Also, mesenchymal cells cultured on the microporous scaffolds show extensive matrix deposition. These results highlight this method as a simple and effective technique to produce dual‐porosity scaffolds that are excellent candidates for bone tissue engineering, as their enhanced bioactivity, protein adsorption, and the extensive matrix deposition observed in‐vitro are good indicators of fast bone integration upon implantation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".