ArticleACS applied materials & interfaces2020
Nanoengineered Osteoinductive Bioink for 3D Bioprinting Bone Tissue.
Article in ACS applied materials & interfaces, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 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
54 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting and Rose-Inspired Medical Applications.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Biofabrication for complex tissue regeneration: a scoping review of translational gaps in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Review
- Additive Manufacturing of Lignocellulosic Aerogels from Minimally Processed Waste Streams.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- NIR Phosphorescent Oxygen Sensors in Natural Hydrogel Matrices.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Narrative Review and Guide: State of the Art and Emerging Opportunities of Bioprinting in Tissue Regeneration and Medical Instrumentation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Recapitulating the bone extracellular matrix through 3D bioprinting using various crosslinking chemistries.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Plant-Origin Compounds and Materials for Advancing Bone Tissue Engineering and 3D Bioprinting: Traditional Medicine Aspects and Current Perspectives.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2025Review
- Stem Cells in Bone Tissue Engineering: Progress, Promises and Challenges.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
- Hierarchical Design of Tissue-Mimetic Fibrillar Hydrogel Scaffolds.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Review
- 3D printing of Ceffe-infused scaffolds for tailored nipple-like cartilage development.BMC biotechnology · 2024Article
- Addition of Laponite to gelatin methacryloyl bioinks improves the rheological properties and printability to create mechanically tailorable cell culture matrices.APL bioengineering · 2024Article
- Additive Manufacturing Applications in Biosensors Technologies.Biosensors · 2024Review
- Advancements in Tissue Engineering: A Review of Bioprinting Techniques, Scaffolds, and Bioinks.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2024Review
- Biomedical Approach of Nanotechnology and Biological Risks: A Mini-Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- In Vitro and In Vivo Biological Assessments of 3D-Bioprinted Scaffolds for Dental Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Antimicrobial and Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds for Orthopedic Infections.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2023Review
- Review
- Laponite-Based Nanocomposite Hydrogels for Drug Delivery Applications.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Review
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
Abstract
Bioprinting is an emerging additive manufacturing approach to the fabrication of patient-specific, implantable three-dimensional (3D) constructs for regenerative medicine. However, developing cell-compatible bioinks with high printability, structural stability, biodegradability, and bioactive characteristics is still a primary challenge for translating 3D bioprinting technology to preclinical and clinal models. To overcome this challenge, we developed a nanoengineered ionic covalent entanglement (NICE) bioink formulation for 3D bone bioprinting. The NICE bioinks allow precise control over printability, mechanical properties, and degradation characteristics, enabling custom 3D fabrication of mechanically resilient, cellularized structures. We demonstrate cell-induced remodeling of 3D bioprinted scaffolds over 60 days, demonstrating deposition of nascent extracellular matrix proteins. Interestingly, the bioprinted constructs induce endochondral differentiation of encapsulated human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) in the absence of osteoinducing agent. Using next-generation transcriptome sequencing (RNA-seq) technology, we establish the role of nanosilicates, a bioactive component of NICE bioink, to stimulate endochondral differentiation at the transcriptome level. Overall, the osteoinductive bioink has the ability to induce formation of osteo-related mineralized extracellular matrix by encapsulated hMSCs in growth factor-free conditions. Furthermore, we demonstrate the ability of NICE bioink to fabricate patient-specific, implantable 3D scaffolds for repair of craniomaxillofacial bone defects. We envision development of this NICE bioink technology toward a realistic clinical process for 3D bioprinting patient-specific bone tissue for regenerative medicine.
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.