MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403528107 · doi:10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6

Comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a pig model by using 3D-bioprinted hydrogel and hybrid constructs

2024· article· en· W4403528107 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofabrication · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsFibrocartilageBiomedical engineeringHyaline cartilageMaterials scienceHyalineSelf-healing hydrogelsCartilage3D bioprintingAnatomyArticular cartilageTissue engineeringPathologyMedicineOsteoarthritisPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cartilage tissue engineering (CTE) with the help of engineered constructs has shown promise for the regeneration of hyaline cartilage, where fibrocartilage may also be formed due to the biomechanical loading resulting from the host weight and movement. Previous studies have primarily reported on hyaline cartilage formation in vitro and/or in small animals, while leaving the fibrocartilage formation undiscovered. In this paper, we, at the first time, present a comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a large animal model of pig by using two constructs (namely hydrogel and hybrid ones) engineered by means of three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting. Both hydrogel and hybrid constructs were printed from the bioink of alginate (2.5%) and ATDC5 cells (chondrogenic cells at a cell density of 5 × 10 6 cells ml −1 ), with the difference in that in the hybrid construct, there was a polycaprolactone (PCL) strand printed between every two bioink strands, which were strategically designed to shield the force imposed on the cells within the bioink strands. Both hydrogel and hybrid constructs were implanted into the chondral defects created in the articular cartilage of weight-bearing portions of pig stifle joints; the cartilage formation was examined at one- and three-months post-implantation, respectively, by means of Safranin O, Trichrome, immunofluorescent staining, and synchrotron radiation-based (SR) inline phase contrast imaging microcomputed tomography (inline-PCI-CT). Glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and collagen type II (Col II) secretion were used to evaluate the hyaline cartilage formation, while collagen type I (Col I) was used to indicate fibrocartilage given that Col I is low in hyaline cartilage but high in fibrocartilage. Our results revealed that cartilage formation was enhanced over time in both hydrogel and hybrid constructs; particularly, the hydrogel construct exhibited more cartilage formation at both one- and three-months post-implantation, while hybrid constructs tended to have less fibrocartilage formed in a long time period. Also, the result from the inline-PCI-CT revealed that the inline-PCI-CT was able to provide not only the information seen in other histology images, but also high-resolution details of biomaterials and regenerating cartilage. This would represent a significant advance toward the non-invasive assessment of cartilage formation regeneration within large animal models and eventually in human patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it