SynthesisCartilage2021
Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Articular Cartilage: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Cartilage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Advances and Challenges in Tissue Engineering: Biomaterials, Cellular Strategies, and Clinical Applications.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Mechanobiology-based strategies for the maturation of biofabricated cartilage constructs.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Construction of organoids using bioprinting technology: a frontier exploration of cartilage repair.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Review
- 3D bioprinting for stickler syndrome: a transformative approach to early-onset joint degeneration.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Current clinical and translational challenges in temporomandibular joint reconstruction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Engineering gene-activated bioprinted scaffolds for enhancing articular cartilage repair.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- High-throughput bioprinting of spheroids for scalable tissue fabrication.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Arthroscopic device with bendable tip for the controlled extrusion of hydrogels on cartilage defects.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A dynamically loadedFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Article
- 3D puzzle-inspired construction of large and complex organ structures for tissue engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2023Article
- Bioinks adapted forRSC advances · 2023Review
- Article
- The treatment of knee cartilage lesions: state of the art.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022Article
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting for Cartilage Tissue Engineering: Insights into Naturally-Derived Bioinks from Land and Marine Sources.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Review
- Progress in 3D Bioprinting Technology for Osteochondral Regeneration.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Additive Manufacturing Strategies for Personalized Drug Delivery Systems and Medical Devices: Fused Filament Fabrication and Semi Solid Extrusion.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Valuable effect of Manuka Honey in increasing the printability and chondrogenic potential of a naturally derived bioink.Materials today. Bio · 2022Article
- Insights into the present and future of cartilage regeneration and joint repair.Cell regeneration (London, England) · 2022Review
- Tethered TGF-β1 in a Hyaluronic Acid-Based Bioink for Bioprinting Cartilaginous Tissues.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTreatment of chondral injury is clinically challenging. Available chondral repair/regeneration techniques have significant shortcomings. A viable and durable tissue engineering strategy for articular cartilage repair remains an unmet need. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the published data on bioprinted articular cartilage with regards to scaffold-based, scaffold-free and
designWe performed a systematic review of studies using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed and ScienceDirect databases were searched and all articles evaluating the use of 3-dimensional (3D) bioprinting in articular cartilage were included. Inclusion criteria included studies written in or translated to English, published in a peer-reviewed journal, and specifically discussing bioinks and/or bioprinting of living cells related to articular cartilage applications. Review papers, articles in a foreign language, and studies not involving bioprinting of living cells related to articular cartilage applications were excluded.
resultsTwenty-seven studies for articular cartilage bioprinting were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The technologies, materials, cell types used in these studies, and the biological and physical properties of the created constructs have been demonstrated.
conclusionThese 27 studies have demonstrated 3D bioprinting of articular cartilage to be a tissue engineering strategy that has tremendous potential translational value. The unique abilities of the varied techniques allow replication of mechanical properties and advances toward zonal differentiation. This review demonstrates that bioprinting has great capacity for clinical cartilage reconstruction and future
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.