2018
DOI: 10.1007/s12274-018-2117-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Engineering subcellular-patterned biointerfaces to regulate the surface wetting of multicellular spheroids

Abstract: Studying the wetting behaviors of multicellular spheroids is crucial in the fields of embryo implantation, cancer propagation and tissue repair. Existing strategies for controlling the wetting of multicellular spheroids mainly focus on surface chemistry and substrate rigidity. Although topography is another important feature in biological micro-environment, its effect on multicellular spheroids wetting has seldom been explored. In this study, the influence of topography on the surface wetting of multicellular … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, as graphene crumpling was never observed in our analyses, we can exclude its effect on substrate wettability and soma clumping 21,23 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Moreover, as graphene crumpling was never observed in our analyses, we can exclude its effect on substrate wettability and soma clumping 21,23 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 73%
“…S2). The flatness of the surface, with a root mean square roughness of about 1.8 nm, made us exclude the presence of features that can lead to discontinuous cell-substrate adhesion 21 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Current well established and routine methods for 3D spheroids fabrication include spinner flasks, bacterial grade dishes, culturing cells on ultralow attachment surfaces including (ULA) plates and method of hanging drop . Using spinner flasks, bacterial grade dishes, and ULA plates result in formation of multiple spheroids per flask/dish/well that show high variability in size.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, it is difficult to study the self‐organization process in living organisms in vivo because it is impractical to change many factors that determine the behavior of living systems. Recently, 3D cellular aggregates, instead of 2Dcell sheets, have been employed as building blocks in order to understand the principles of cell–cell and cell–matrix adhesion, as well as cell sorting, because 3D cellular aggregates can better simulate real cell morphology, fate and metabolic activities in vivo. To organize these cellular aggregates, biodegradable polymers, and hydrogels, have been employed as supporting scaffolds for seeding or encasing cells, including alginate with extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins, poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA) and methacrylated gelatine (GelMA).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Vrij et al used pure cells as a living, self‐scaffolding building block for the free‐form fabrication of stable tissue constructs with defined complex geometries by sequential self‐organization. By building these 3D cellular aggregates, enormous efforts have been devoted to studying the topographic interactions between cellular aggregates and substrates, or the macroscale wetting and fusion of cellular aggregates . However, it remains unclear how topography affects self‐organization of cellular aggregates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%