Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27617026›Full record

ArticleNano today2016

3D Printed Bionic Nanodevices.

Yong Lin Kong, Maneesh K Gupta, Blake N Johnson, Michael C McAlpine

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nano today, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Bio-hybrid electronic and photonic devices.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Ingestible Functional Magnetic Robot with Localized Flexibility (MR-LF).Advanced intelligent systems (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Aerosol JetInternational journal of bioprinting · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 3D Printed Neural Regeneration Devices.Advanced functional materials · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yong Lin KongKoch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA.
Maneesh K GuptaAir Force Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, USA.
Blake N JohnsonDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, USA.
Michael C McAlpineDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA.

Funding

3D Printed Nano-Bionic OrgansDP2EB020537 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI MCALPINE, MICHAEL · 2014 to 2019
$2.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS DP2 EB020537
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to three-dimensionally interweave biological and functional materials could enable the creation of bionic devices possessing unique and compelling geometries, properties, and functionalities. Indeed, interfacing high performance active devices with biology could impact a variety of fields, including regenerative bioelectronic medicines, smart prosthetics, medical robotics, and human-machine interfaces. Biology, from the molecular scale of DNA and proteins, to the macroscopic scale of tissues and organs, is three-dimensional, often soft and stretchable, and temperature sensitive. This renders most biological platforms incompatible with the fabrication and materials processing methods that have been developed and optimized for functional electronics, which are typically planar, rigid and brittle. A number of strategies have been developed to overcome these dichotomies. One particularly novel approach is the use of extrusion-based multi-material 3D printing, which is an additive manufacturing technology that offers a freeform fabrication strategy. This approach addresses the dichotomies presented above by (1) using 3D printing and imaging for customized, hierarchical, and interwoven device architectures; (2) employing nanotechnology as an enabling route for introducing high performance materials, with the potential for exhibiting properties not found in the bulk; and (3) 3D printing a range of soft and nanoscale materials to enable the integration of a diverse palette of high quality functional nanomaterials with biology. Further, 3D printing is a multi-scale platform, allowing for the incorporation of functional nanoscale inks, the printing of microscale features, and ultimately the creation of macroscale devices. This blending of 3D printing, novel nanomaterial properties, and 'living' platforms may enable next-generation bionic systems. In this review, we highlight this synergistic integration of the unique properties of nanomaterials with the versatility of extrusion-based 3D printing technologies to interweave nanomaterials and fabricate novel bionic devices.

Indexed as

3D printing4D printingactive functional devicesbioelectronicsbio-nano hybridsbionic devicescyborgselectronic skinsnanodevicesnanomaterials

Identifiers

PMID27617026
PMCPMC5016035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.