ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Advances in Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds with Carbon-Based Nanomaterials for Bone Regeneration.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Biomimetic Strategies for Bone Regeneration: Smart Scaffolds and Multiscale Cues.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Fabrication and evaluation of PLA/CPP/GO composite scaffolds: the role of graphene oxide content in regulating properties.RSC advances · 2025Article
- Nanomaterial-based scaffolds for bone regeneration with piezoelectric properties.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Evolution in Bone Tissue Regeneration: From Grafts to Innovative Biomaterials.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- 3D Printing of a Porous Zn-1Mg-0.1Sr Alloy Scaffold: A Study on Mechanical Properties, Degradability, and Biosafety.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Biphasic Calcium Phosphate and Activated Carbon Microparticles in a Plasma Clot for Bone Reconstruction and In Situ Drug Delivery: A Feasibility Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Towards the Clinical Translation of 3D PLGA/β-TCP/Mg Composite Scaffold for Cranial Bone Regeneration.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Direct Ink Writing of Carbon-Doped Polymeric Composite Ink: A Review on Its Requirements and Applications.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2023Review
- Additive manufacturing of sustainable biomaterials for biomedical applications.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2023Review
- The Mechanical, Thermal, and Chemical Properties of PLA-Mg Filaments Produced via a Colloidal Route for Fused-Filament Fabrication.Polymers · 2022Article
- Ultra-low binder content 3D printed calcium phosphate graphene scaffolds as resorbable, osteoinductive matrices that support bone formation in vivo.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Novel Glucose-Sensitive Scaffold Accelerates Osteogenesis in Diabetic Conditions.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Advances in Use of Nanomaterials for Musculoskeletal Regeneration.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
- Article
- The Investigation of Interlaminar Failures Caused by Production Parameters in Case of Additive Manufactured Polymers.Polymers · 2021Article
- 3D Printing of Micro- and Nanoscale Bone Substitutes: A Review on Technical and Translational Perspectives.International journal of nanomedicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone possesses an inherent capacity to fix itself. However, when a defect larger than a critical size appears, external solutions must be applied. Traditionally, an autograft has been the most used solution in these situations. However, it presents some issues such as donor-site morbidity. In this context, porous biodegradable scaffolds have emerged as an interesting solution. They act as external support for cell growth and degrade when the defect is repaired. For an adequate performance, these scaffolds must meet specific requirements: biocompatibility, interconnected porosity, mechanical properties and biodegradability. To obtain the required porosity, many methods have conventionally been used (e.g., electrospinning, freeze-drying and salt-leaching). However, from the development of additive manufacturing methods a promising solution for this application has been proposed since such methods allow the complete customisation and control of scaffold geometry and porosity. Furthermore, carbon-based nanomaterials present the potential to impart osteoconductivity and antimicrobial properties and reinforce the matrix from a mechanical perspective. These properties make them ideal for use as nanomaterials to improve the properties and performance of scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. This work explores the potential research opportunities and challenges of 3D printed biodegradable composite-based scaffolds containing carbon-based nanomaterials for bone tissue engineering applications.
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.