Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34258499›Full record

ReviewAPL bioengineering2021

Replace and repair: Biomimetic bioprinting for effective muscle engineering.

Cooper Blake, Oliver Massey, Mitchell Boyd-Moss, Kate Firipis, Aaqil Rifai, Stephanie Franks, Anita Quigley, Robert Kapsa, David R Nisbet, Richard J Williams

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in APL bioengineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. MXene Bioinks for 3D Bioprinting: Design and Translation.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Heparin-Modified Aligned Collagen Scaffolds Enhance In Vitro Myogenesis.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2026
    Article
  3. Graphene and TiACS applied bio materials · 2026
    Article
  4. Heparin-modified aligned collagen scaffolds enhancebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Biomimetic Polyurethanes in Tissue Engineering.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Functional biomaterials.APL bioengineering · 2022
    Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Cooper BlakeInstitute of Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, VIC 3216, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0281-4262
Oliver MasseyInstitute of Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, VIC 3216, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6343-9032
Mitchell Boyd-Moss
Aaqil Rifai
Stephanie FranksLaboratory of Advanced Biomaterials, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Anita Quigley
Robert Kapsa
Deakin University · AUSt Vincent's Hospital Melbourne · AUAustralian National University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The debilitating effects of muscle damage, either through ischemic injury or volumetric muscle loss (VML), can have significant impacts on patients, and yet there are few effective treatments. This challenge arises when function is degraded due to significant amounts of skeletal muscle loss, beyond the regenerative ability of endogenous repair mechanisms. Currently available surgical interventions for VML are quite invasive and cannot typically restore function adequately. In response to this, many new bioengineering studies implicate 3D bioprinting as a viable option. Bioprinting for VML repair includes three distinct phases: printing and seeding, growth and maturation, and implantation and application. Although this 3D bioprinting technology has existed for several decades, the advent of more advanced and novel printing techniques has brought us closer to clinical applications. Recent studies have overcome previous limitations in diffusion distance with novel microchannel construct architectures and improved myotubule alignment with highly biomimetic nanostructures. These structures may also enhance angiogenic and nervous ingrowth post-implantation, though further research to improve these parameters has been limited. Inclusion of neural cells has also shown to improve myoblast maturation and development of neuromuscular junctions, bringing us one step closer to functional, implantable skeletal muscle constructs. Given the current state of skeletal muscle 3D bioprinting, the most pressing future avenues of research include furthering our understanding of the physical and biochemical mechanisms of myotube development and expanding our control over macroscopic and microscopic construct structures. Further to this, current investigation needs to be expanded from immunocompromised rodent and murine myoblast models to more clinically applicable human cell lines as we move closer to viable therapeutic implementation.

Identifiers

PMID34258499
PMCPMC8270648
OpenAlexW3181736585

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.