ReviewJournal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials2011
Direct-write bioprinting three-dimensional biohybrid systems for future regenerative therapies.
Review in Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
131 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Cell-Friendly Indirect 3D Printing Strategy for Scaffold Fabrication.Macromolecular rapid communications · 2026Article
- Bioprinted Scaffolds for Biomimetic Applications: A State-of-the-Art Technology.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Preclinical Evaluation and Advancements in Vascularized Bone Tissue Engineering.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Bioactive Glass and Melittin Thin Films Deposited by MAPLE for Titanium Implant Functionalization.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- DNA-encoded dynamic hydrogels for 3D bioprinted cartilage organoids.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Recapitulating the bone extracellular matrix through 3D bioprinting using various crosslinking chemistries.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Factorial Design of Experiment Method to Characterize Bioprinting Process Parameters to Obtain the Targeted Scaffold Porosity.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2024Article
- Recent Advances in Implantable 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Repair of Spinal Cord Injury.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2024Review
- Robot-based 6D bioprinting for soft tissue biomedical applications.Engineering in life sciences · 2024Article
- Advanced PEG-tyramine biomaterial ink for precision engineering of perfusable and flexible small-diameter vascular constructs via coaxial printing.Bioactive materials · 2024Article
- Review
- Unleashing the Power of Undifferentiated Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Bioprinting: Current Progress and Future Prospects.International journal of stem cells · 2024Review
- Contribution of the ELRs to the development of advancedFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- 3D Printing for Personalized Solutions in Cervical Spondylosis.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2024Review
- Revolutionizing Intervertebral Disc Regeneration: Advances and Future Directions in Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Hydrogel Scaffolds.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024Review
- Progress in bioprinting technology for tissue regeneration.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2023Review
- Article
- In Vitro Models of Head and Neck Cancer: From Primitive to Most Advanced.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Diverse Applications of Three-Dimensional Printing in Biomedical Engineering: A Review.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2023Review
71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regenerative medicine seeks to repair or replace dysfunctional tissues with engineered biological or biohybrid systems. Current clinical regenerative models utilize simple uniform tissue constructs formed with cells cultured onto biocompatible scaffolds. Future regenerative therapies will require the fabrication of complex three-dimensional constructs containing multiple cell types and extracellular matrices. We believe bioprinting technologies will provide a key role in the design and construction of future engineered tissues for cell-based and regenerative therapies. This review describes the current state-of-the-art bioprinting technologies, focusing on direct-write bioprinting. We describe a number of process and device considerations for successful bioprinting of composite biohybrid constructs. In addition, we have provided baseline direct-write printing parameters for a hydrogel system (Pluronic F127) often used in cardiovascular applications. Direct-write dispensed lines (gels with viscosities ranging from 30 mPa s to greater than 600 × 10⁶ mPa s) were measured following mechanical and pneumatic printing via three commercially available needle sizes (20 ga, 25 ga, and 30 ga). Example patterns containing microvascular cells and isolated microvessel fragments were also bioprinted into composite 3D structures. Cells and vessel fragments remained viable and maintained in vitro behavior after incorporation into biohybrid structures. Direct-write bioprinting of biologicals provides a unique method to design and fabricate complex, multicomponent 3D structures for experimental use. We hope our design insights and baseline parameter descriptions of direct-write bioprinting will provide a useful foundation for colleagues to incorporate this 3D fabrication method into future regenerative therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.