Mechanical, Biochemical, and Multicellular Effects on Vessel Network Morphometrics in a Microfluidic Vasculature-on-a-Chip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Microvascular networks (MVNs) formed via endothelial cell self-assembly in 3D hydrogels have emerged as a widely used platform for modeling vascularized tissues and studying vascular pathophysiology. Conventional MVN systems incorporate supporting fibroblasts and may include biochemical cues such as VEGF, FGF, or S1P, as well as mechanical stimuli like luminal flow, yet the impact of these variables on MVN morphology and function remains incompletely understood. Here, we systematically investigated the effects of fibroblast concentration, fibroblast-conditioned media, angiogenic factors, and luminal flow on the morphology, perfusability, and vessel wall integrity of MVNs cultured in a microfluidic vasculature-on-a-chip. In addition to standard branch-based metrics such as vessel coverage area and diameter, we developed and applied novel void-based morphological parameters that quantify the size, shape, and distribution of vessel-free spaces to capture subtle differences across MVN culture conditions. Our results demonstrate that high fibroblast-to-endothelial cell ratios accelerate MVN formation but promote excessive vessel fusion, while MVNs cultured without fibroblasts—using only conditioned media or soluble factors—exhibited patch-like, non-physiological morphology with reduced branch formation. Direct inclusion of fibroblasts proved essential for promoting the thin, interconnected vascular structures characteristic of in vivo microvasculature and could not be substituted by soluble cues alone. Furthermore, the presence or absence of fibroblasts modulated MVN responsiveness to luminal flow. Overall, our void-based analysis method enabled more sensitive discrimination of MVN morphological features than traditional branch-based metrics and offers a reduced-data, high-content approach suitable for integration with machine learning and AI-assisted image analysis pipelines. This platform provides a new framework for optimizing MVN culture protocols and advancing vascular tissue engineering studies, particularly for the advancement of organ-on-a-chip (OOC) and microphysiological systems.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".