Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28621834›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society2017

From intricate to integrated: Biofabrication of articulating joints.

Wilhelmina Margaretha Groen, Paweena Diloksumpan, Paul René van Weeren, Riccardo Levato, Jos Malda

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 3D Bioprinted Highly Elastic Hybrid Constructs for Advanced Fibrocartilaginous Tissue Regeneration.Chemistry of materials : a publication of the American Chemical Society · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Impact of industry 4.0 to create advancements in orthopaedics.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2020
    Article
  17. From Shape to Function: The Next Step in Bioprinting.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Wilhelmina Margaretha GroenDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Paweena DiloksumpanFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Equine Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Paul René van WeerenFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Equine Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Riccardo LevatoDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jos MaldaDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

European Research Council 647426
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Articulating joints owe their function to the specialized architecture and the complex interplay between multiple tissues including cartilage, bone and synovium. Especially the cartilage component has limited self-healing capacity and damage often leads to the onset of osteoarthritis, eventually resulting in failure of the joint as an organ. Although in its infancy, biofabrication has emerged as a promising technology to reproduce the intricate organization of the joint, thus enabling the introduction of novel surgical treatments, regenerative therapies, and new sets of tools to enhance our understanding of joint physiology and pathology. Herein, we address the current challenges to recapitulate the complexity of articulating joints and how biofabrication could overcome them. The combination of multiple materials, biological cues and cells in a layer-by-layer fashion, can assist in reproducing both the zonal organization of cartilage and the gradual transition from resilient cartilage toward the subchondral bone in biofabricated osteochondral grafts. In this way, optimal integration of engineered constructs with the natural surrounding tissues can be obtained. Mechanical characteristics, including the smoothness and low friction that are hallmarks of the articular surface, can be tuned with multi-head or hybrid printers by controlling the spatial patterning of printed structures. Moreover, biofabrication can use digital medical images as blueprints for printing patient-specific implants. Finally, the current rapid advances in biofabrication hold significant potential for developing joint-on-a-chip models for personalized medicine and drug testing or even for the creation of implants that may be used to treat larger parts of the articulating joint. © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the Orthopaedic Research Society. J Orthop Res 35:2089-2097, 2017.

Indexed as

BioprintingCartilage, ArticularJoint ProsthesisAnimalsHumansRegenerationTissue Engineeringadditive manufacturingarticular cartilagebioprintingosteochondralregenerative medicine

Identifiers

PMID28621834
PMCPMC5655743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.