ReviewBiofabrication2021
Recent advances in 3D bioprinting of musculoskeletal tissues.
Review in Biofabrication, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current evidence and emerging therapeutic strategies for non-exercise interventions in sarcopenia associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Additive Manufacturing of Engineered Tissue Constructs: Current Strategies and Future Directions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The promising applications of 3D printing technology for diagnosis and therapy of cancer: Recent advances and challenges.BioImpacts : BI · 2026Review
- Converging Architectures: Precision Biomanufacturing and Soft Robotics Rewiring Tissue Engineering.Micromachines · 2025Article
- The rational design, biofunctionalization and biological properties of orthopedic porous titanium implants: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Bottom-up Biomaterial strategies for creating tailored stem cells in regenerative medicine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Tendon regeneration deserves better: focused review onFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- The interplay between mesenchymal stem cells and the immune microenvironment in rotator cuff tendon-to-bone healing: current progress and future directions.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- 3D bioprinting patient-specific grafts for tendon/ligament repair in motion: emerging trends and challenges.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Translational Aspects of 3D and 4D Printing and Bioprinting.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Review
- The promising approach of 3D bioprinting for diabetic foot ulcer treatment: A concise review of recent developments.Heliyon · 2024Review
- MicroRNA-29c-tetrahedral framework nucleic acids: Towards osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells and bone regeneration in critical-sized calvarial defects.Cell proliferation · 2024Article
- Droplet bioprinting of acellular and cell-laden structures at high-resolutions.Biofabrication · 2024Article
- Integrating bioprinting, cell therapies and drug delivery towards in vivo regeneration of cartilage, bone and osteochondral tissue.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Review
- Bioprinted vascular tissue: Assessing functions from cellular, tissue to organ levels.Materials today. Bio · 2023Review
- Translational biomaterials of four-dimensional bioprinting for tissue regeneration.Biofabrication · 2023Review
- 3D printing metal implants in orthopedic surgery: Methods, applications and future prospects.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2023Review
- 3D Bioprinting in Otolaryngology: A Review.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Review
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Naturally Derived Hydrogels for the Production of Biomimetic Living Tissues: Benefits and Challenges.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Applications of functionally-adapted hydrogels in tendon repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The musculoskeletal system is essential for maintaining posture, protecting organs, facilitating locomotion, and regulating various cellular and metabolic functions. Injury to this system due to trauma or wear is common, and severe damage may require surgery to restore function and prevent further harm. Autografts are the current gold standard for the replacement of lost or damaged tissues. However, these grafts are constrained by limited supply and donor site morbidity. Allografts, xenografts, and alloplastic materials represent viable alternatives, but each of these methods also has its own problems and limitations. Technological advances in three-dimensional (3D) printing and its biomedical adaptation, 3D bioprinting, have the potential to provide viable, autologous tissue-like constructs that can be used to repair musculoskeletal defects. Though bioprinting is currently unable to develop mature, implantable tissues, it can pattern cells in 3D constructs with features facilitating maturation and vascularization. Further advances in the field may enable the manufacture of constructs that can mimic native tissues in complexity, spatial heterogeneity, and ultimately, clinical utility. This review studies the use of 3D bioprinting for engineering bone, cartilage, muscle, tendon, ligament, and their interface tissues. Additionally, the current limitations and challenges in the field are discussed and the prospects for future progress are highlighted.
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.