ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2020
3D Printing for Bone Regeneration.
Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D-Bioprinted Multifunctional Nanocomposite Scaffolds for Alveolar Bone-Periodontal Ligament-Root Cementum Regeneration: A Narrative Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Natural Polyphenol Corilagin Enhances Osteogenesis and Chondrogenesis Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Implications for Bone and Cartilage Regeneration.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Osteoporosis: molecular pathogenesis and therapeutic interventions.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
- Synthesis, Characterization, and Enzyme Conjugation of Polycaprolactone Nanofibers for Tissue Engineering.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Three-Dimensional Root Replicas of Polycaprolactone: A Radiological and Histological Evaluation of a Case Report.Reports (MDPI) · 2025Article
- Polycaprolactone/Doped Bioactive Glass Composite Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- The bone microenvironment: new insights into the role of stem cells and cell communication in bone regeneration.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- Integrating Micro- and Nanostructured Platforms and Biological Drugs to Enhance Biomaterial-Based Bone Regeneration Strategies.Biomacromolecules · 2025Review
- Advances in 3D-Printed scaffolds for bone defect repair: material strategies and synergistic functional performance.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Exploring the frontiers: The potential and challenges of bioactive scaffolds in osteosarcoma treatment and bone regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- A Systematic Review of the Contribution of Additive Manufacturing toward Orthopedic Applications.ACS omega · 2024Review
- Composites of Polylactic Acid with Diatomaceous Earth for 3D-Printing Biocompatible Scaffolds: A Systematic Study of Their Mechanical, Thermal, and Biocompatibility Properties.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Beyond hype: unveiling the Real challenges in clinical translation of 3D printed bone scaffolds and the fresh prospects of bioprinted organoids.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2024Review
- Individualized Design Application of 3-Dimensional Printing Navigational Template for Pedicle Screw Installation: A Training Case Report.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Fabrication Strategies for Bioceramic Scaffolds in Bone Tissue Engineering with Generative Design Applications.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Additively Manufactured SiOACS applied materials & interfaces · 2024Article
- Review
- Magnetic Resonance-Based Analytical Tools to Study Polyvinylpyrrolidone-Hydroxyapatite Composites.Polymers · 2023Article
- Design and 3D Printing of Personalized Hybrid and Gradient Structures for Critical Size Bone Defects.ACS applied bio materials · 2023Article
- Improving Biocompatibility for Next Generation of Metallic Implants.Progress in materials science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to illustrate the current state of 3D printing (3DP) technology used in biomedical industry towards bone regeneration. We have focused our efforts towards correlating materials and structural design aspects of 3DP with biological response from host tissue upon implantation. The primary question that we have tried to address is-can 3DP be a viable technology platform for bone regeneration devices? RECENT
findingsRecent findings show that 3DP is a versatile technology platform for numerous materials for mass customizable bone regeneration devices that are also getting approval from different regulatory bodies worldwide. After a brief introduction of different 3DP technologies, this review elaborates 3DP of different materials and devices for bone regeneration. From cell-based bioprinting to acellular patient-matched metallic or ceramic devices, 3DP has tremendous potential to improve the quality of human life through bone regeneration among patients of all ages.
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.