Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32932676›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Overview of Current Advances in Extrusion Bioprinting for Skin Applications.

Arantza Perez-Valle, Cristina Del Amo, Isabel Andia

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Freeze-Drying of Platelet-Rich Plasma: The Quest for Standardization.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Biomaterials for extrusion-based bioprinting and biomedical applications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  12. Advances in tissue engineering and biofabrication forBioprinting (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. 3D Bioprinting Technology and Hydrogels Used in the Process.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arantza Perez-ValleRegenerative Therapies, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Cruces University Hospital, Plaza Cruces 12, 48903 Barakaldo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3108-4978
Cristina Del AmoRegenerative Therapies, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Cruces University Hospital, Plaza Cruces 12, 48903 Barakaldo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3796-4482
Isabel AndiaRegenerative Therapies, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Cruces University Hospital, Plaza Cruces 12, 48903 Barakaldo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0607-4767
BioCruces Health research Institute · ES

Funding

Department of Economic Development and Infrastructure from the Basque Government Elkartek Program KK-2019-0006-BC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioprinting technologies, which have the ability to combine various human cell phenotypes, signaling proteins, extracellular matrix components, and other scaffold-like biomaterials, are currently being exploited for the fabrication of human skin in regenerative medicine. We performed a systematic review to appraise the latest advances in 3D bioprinting for skin applications, describing the main cell phenotypes, signaling proteins, and bioinks used in extrusion platforms. To understand the current limitations of this technology for skin bioprinting, we briefly address the relevant aspects of skin biology. This field is in the early stage of development, and reported research on extrusion bioprinting for skin applications has shown moderate progress. We have identified two major trends. First, the biomimetic approach uses cell-laden natural polymers, including fibrinogen, decellularized extracellular matrix, and collagen. Second, the material engineering line of research, which is focused on the optimization of printable biomaterials that expedite the manufacturing process, mainly involves chemically functionalized polymers and reinforcement strategies through molecular blending and postprinting interventions, i.e., ionic, covalent, or light entanglement, to enhance the mechanical properties of the construct and facilitate layer-by-layer deposition. Skin constructs manufactured using the biomimetic approach have reached a higher level of complexity in biological terms, including up to five different cell phenotypes and mirroring the epidermis, dermis and hypodermis. The confluence of the two perspectives, representing interdisciplinary inputs, is required for further advancement toward the future translation of extrusion bioprinting and to meet the urgent clinical demand for skin equivalents.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsBiomimeticsBioprintingHumansPolymersPrinting, Three-DimensionalRegenerative MedicineSkinTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsBiocompatible MaterialsPolymersbioinksbioprintingcellsextrusionregenerative medicineskin

Identifiers

PMID32932676
PMCPMC7555324
OpenAlexW3085469852

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.