Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32679657›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020

3D Printing Approach in Dentistry: The Future for Personalized Oral Soft Tissue Regeneration.

Dobrila Nesic, Birgit M Schaefer, Yue Sun, Nikola Saulacic, Irena Sailer

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Therapeutic Scope of Orofacial Mesenchymal Stem Cells.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  8. Current Trends and Innovations in Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstruction.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. In vitro comparison of physical characteristics of milled versus printed zirconia discs.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2024
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Recent advances in additive manufacturing of patient-specific devices for dental and maxillofacial rehabilitation.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2024
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dobrila NesicDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Rue Michel-Servet 1, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1609-9255
Birgit M SchaeferGeistlich Pharma AG, Bahnhofstrasse 40, CH-6110 Wolhusen, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6472-1550
Yue SunDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Rue Michel-Servet 1, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.
Nikola SaulacicDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 10, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3960-4920
Irena SailerDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Rue Michel-Servet 1, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.
University of Geneva · CHGeistlich Pharma (Switzerland) · CHUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology allows the production of an individualized 3D object based on a material of choice, a specific computer-aided design and precise manufacturing. Developments in digital technology, smart biomaterials and advanced cell culturing, combined with 3D printing, provide promising grounds for patient-tailored treatments. In dentistry, the "digital workflow" comprising intraoral scanning for data acquisition, object design and 3D printing, is already in use for manufacturing of surgical guides, dental models and reconstructions. 3D printing, however, remains un-investigated for oral mucosa/gingiva. This scoping literature review provides an overview of the 3D printing technology and its applications in regenerative medicine to then describe 3D printing in dentistry for the production of surgical guides, educational models and the biological reconstructions of periodontal tissues from laboratory to a clinical case. The biomaterials suitable for oral soft tissues printing are outlined. The current treatments and their limitations for oral soft tissue regeneration are presented, including "off the shelf" products and the blood concentrate (PRF). Finally, tissue engineered gingival equivalents are described as the basis for future 3D-printed oral soft tissue constructs. The existing knowledge exploring different approaches could be applied to produce patient-tailored 3D-printed oral soft tissue graft with an appropriate inner architecture and outer shape, leading to a functional as well as aesthetically satisfying outcome.

Indexed as

3D printingbiomaterialsgingivaoral soft tissuesPRFtissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID32679657
PMCPMC7408636
OpenAlexW3042688822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.