Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

LNGFR promoting osteogenic differentiation of ectomesenchyme stem cells via activation of GHR-JAK-STAT/IGF1 signaling pathway.

Stem cell research & therapy·2026
Same author

Traumatic Intracranial Displacement of an Intact Temporomandibular Joint Condyle: A Case Report and Literature Review.

The Journal of craniofacial surgery·2026
Same author

Poly (d, l-lactide)/polyvinyl alcohol-based injectable microspheres with inflammation alleviation and cartilage regeneration enhancement for treatment of temporomandibular joints osteoarthritis.

Regenerative biomaterials·2026
Same author

Apoptotic vesicles from endothelial cells promote endothelial progenitor cell differentiation and angiogenesis via miR-30a-5p mediated activation of the EGFR/PI3K/AKT/VEGF pathway.

Stem cell research & therapy·2026
Same author

OsteoNet: A deep learning framework linking cellular morphology to molecular markers for quantifying osteogenic differentiation.

Computational and structural biotechnology journal·2026
Same author

A transcriptome-based tool for assessing skin aging reveals the ameliorative effect of stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles on UVB-induced aging.

BMC genomics·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 16, 2026

Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
10:28

Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration

Published on: November 16, 2018

Comparison of three inoculation methods for bone tissue engineering.

Gu Cheng1, Xi Chen, Zhi Li

  • 1The State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology, Hubei-MOST, Ministry of Education, Wuhan, China.

The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
|November 29, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The two-side cell inoculation method is superior for bone tissue engineering, improving cell distribution and enhancing bone formation. This technique offers the best results for scaffold seeding in regenerative medicine.

More Related Videos

Integrated Bone Formation Through In Vivo Endochondral Ossification Using Mesenchymal Stem Cells
06:05

Integrated Bone Formation Through In Vivo Endochondral Ossification Using Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Published on: July 14, 2023

Decellularized Apple-Derived Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering In Vitro and In Vivo
09:49

Decellularized Apple-Derived Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering In Vitro and In Vivo

Published on: February 23, 2024

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 16, 2026

Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
10:28

Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration

Published on: November 16, 2018

Integrated Bone Formation Through In Vivo Endochondral Ossification Using Mesenchymal Stem Cells
06:05

Integrated Bone Formation Through In Vivo Endochondral Ossification Using Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Published on: July 14, 2023

Decellularized Apple-Derived Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering In Vitro and In Vivo
09:49

Decellularized Apple-Derived Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering In Vitro and In Vivo

Published on: February 23, 2024

Area of Science:

  • Biomaterials Science
  • Regenerative Medicine
  • Tissue Engineering

Background:

  • Optimizing cell delivery into scaffolds is crucial for successful bone tissue engineering.
  • Current methods for seeding cells into scaffolds have limitations in achieving uniform cell distribution and deep penetration.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the effectiveness of three cell inoculation methods for scaffolds: two-side, single-side, and type 1 collagen gel inoculation.
  • To evaluate the impact of each method on cell growth, distribution, and bone formation.

Main Methods:

  • Bone marrow stromal cells from New Zealand rabbits were used.
  • Cells were inoculated into 3D chitosan/beta-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds using three distinct methods.
  • Cell cultures were analyzed for distribution, cell number, and penetration depth.

Main Results:

  • Type 1 collagen method showed best initial cell distribution (1 week), while the two-side method excelled in uniformity from 2-3 weeks.
  • The type 1 collagen group had a higher number of inoculated cells initially.
  • The two-side inoculation method achieved the deepest cell penetration into the scaffolds.

Conclusions:

  • The two-side inoculation method significantly improves in vitro cell number and distribution.
  • This method enhances both the quality and rate of in vivo bone formation.
  • The two-side inoculation technique is identified as the most suitable for bone tissue engineering applications.