ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Bioactive Inks Development for Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: A Mini-Review.
Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Innovative prospects in 3D printed bio-scaffolds for osteochondral tissue engineering: A systematic review.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- BMSC-NFMC Model for Vascular Regulation and Interface Integration in Osteochondral Regeneration.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Tissue engineering and future directions in regenerative medicine for knee cartilage repair: a comprehensive review.Croatian medical journal · 2024Review
- Article
- 3D Bioprinting in Otolaryngology: A Review.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Review
- Characterization of Biocompatibility of Functional Bioinks for 3D Bioprinting.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Advances in Peptide-Based Hydrogel for Tissue Engineering.Polymers · 2023Review
- [3D printing in trauma surgery : Germany lags far behind].Der Unfallchirurg · 2022Article
- Review
- A critical review on polydopamine surface-modified scaffolds in musculoskeletal regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Nowadays, a prevalent joint disease affecting both cartilage and subchondral bone is osteoarthritis. Osteochondral tissue, a complex tissue unit, exhibited limited self-renewal potential. Furthermore, its gradient properties, including mechanical property, bio-compositions, and cellular behaviors, present a challenge in repairing and regenerating damaged osteochondral tissues. Here, tissue engineering and translational medicine development using bioprinting technology provided a promising strategy for osteochondral tissue repair. In this regard, personalized stratified scaffolds, which play an influential role in osteochondral regeneration, can provide potential treatment options in early-stage osteoarthritis to delay or avoid the use of joint replacements. Accordingly, bioactive scaffolds with possible integration with surrounding tissue and controlling inflammatory responses have promising future tissue engineering perspectives. This minireview focuses on introducing biologically active inks for bioprinting the hierarchical scaffolds, containing growth factors and bioactive materials for 3D printing of regenerative osteochondral substitutes.
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.