SVF
Level D· Preclinical EvidenceLaboratory Study

A scaffold-free cartilage construct fabricated using a bio 3D printer accelerates critical-size bone defect regeneration.

Yoshizato H., Murata D., Kashimoto S., Nonaka T., Fujimoto R., Nagaishi Y.

Laboratory Study with a reported sample of 9 on Cartilage Damage, Chronic Inflammation, published in J Orthop Translat (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
J Orthop Translat (2026)
Country
Singapore
Reported sample size
9
PMID
41800230
DOI
10.1016/j.jot.2025.101033

Abstract (original English)

Critical-size bone defects (CSD), often resulting from trauma or tumour resection, represent a challenging clinical condition that is difficult to treat. Although autologous bone grafting is a common treatment, limitations such as donor site morbidity necessitate the development of novel therapeutic strategies. Approaches that mimic endochondral ossification, the natural process of bone development and healing, are increasingly recognised for their bone regenerative potential. The combination of mesenchymal stem cells and scaffolds, used in many bone regeneration studies, has drawbacks, such as scaffold-derived complications including chronic inflammation and fibrosis. To overcome these issues, we used a bio-three-dimensional (3D) printer that enables the fabrication of scaffold-free 3D cellular constructs. This study aimed to establish a novel therapeutic strategy for CSD by generating scaffold-free cartilage constructs from rat adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (rAT-MSCs) and evaluating their regenerative potential. Scaffold-free cellular constructs were fabricated using rAT-MSCs. Cartilage constructs were generated by chondrogenic induction. A 5-mm CSD was created in the diaphysis of the rat femur. Three experimental groups were established: a Defect group (n = 9), in which no material was implanted into the defect; an MSC group (n = 9), in which undifferentia

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence comes from animal or laboratory studies and has not been confirmed in humans.

How we grade evidence
Back & SpineCartilage DamageChronic Inflammation
View on PubMedDOI

Related research