ArticleJournal of manufacturing processes2022
Rheological Analysis of Bio-ink for 3D Bio-printing Processes.
Article in Journal of manufacturing processes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 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
47 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in 3D bioprinting of immunoregulatory biomaterials for bone regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- A one-step volumetric biofabrication platform for complex hydrogel-based hollow biomaterials.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Handheld Bioprinters in Skin Regeneration: Current Landscape, Clinical Promise, and the Road Ahead.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Next-generation epidermal patches: Bridging 3D and multidimensional printing for biomedical and personal care innovations.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Next-Generation Bioinks in 3D Bioprinting: Advances, Challenges, and Emerging Opportunities.ACS omega · 2026Review
- Emerging Nano Bioinks in Bioprinting: Functional Materials, Engineering Strategies, and Biomedical Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Bioprinted Tumor Microenvironment Models Reveal Immune Evasion and Guide CAR-NK Therapeutic Strategies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Anisotropic mechanotransductive tissue constructsBioactive materials · 2026Article
- The Role of 3D Printing in Regenerative Medicine: A Game-Changer in Tissue Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Unconventional bioprinting modalities for advanced tissue biofabrication.Biomaterials · 2026Review
- Osteogenic Potential of 3D Bioprinted Collagen Scaffolds Enriched with Bone Marrow Stromal Cells, BMP-2, and Hydroxyapatite in a Rabbit Calvarial Defect Model.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Photo Crosslinkable Hybrid Hydrogels for High Fidelity Direct Write 3D Printing: Rheology, Curing Kinetics, and Bio-Scaffold Fabrication.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Injectable Hydrogels for Biomedical and Aesthetic Applications: Focus on Rheological Characteristics.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Data-Driven Optimization of Bioink Formulations for Extrusion-Based Bioprinting: A Predictive Modeling Approach.Journal of manufacturing science and engineering · 2025Article
- Integrating Decision Trees and Clustering for Efficient Optimization of Bioink Rheology and 3D Bioprinted Construct Microenvironments.Journal of manufacturing science and engineering · 2025Article
- Flexibly actuated pneumatic extrusion with in-situ monitoring for direct ink writing of heterogeneous and pressure-vulnerable materials.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Structuring the Future of Cultured Meat: Hybrid Gel-Based Scaffolds for Edibility and Functionality.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- 3D-Printed Multi-Stimulus-Responsive Hydrogels: Fabrication and Characterization.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Effects of Extrusion Pressure During 3D Printing on Viability of Human Bronchial Epithelial Cells in 3D Printed Samples.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
3D bio-printing is an emerging technology to fabricate tissue scaffold in-vitro through the controlled allocation of biomaterial and cells, which can mimic the in-vivo counterpart of living tissue. Live cells are often encapsulated into the biomaterials (i.e., bio-ink) and extruded by controlling the printing parameters. The functionality of the bioink depends upon three factors: (a) printability, (b) shape fidelity, and (c) bio-compatibility. Increasing viscosity will improve the printability and the shape fidelity but require higher applied extrusion pressure, which is detrimental to the living cell dwelling in the bio-ink, which is often ignored in the bio-ink optimization process. This paper demonstrates a roadmap to develop and optimize bio-inks, ensuring printability, shape fidelity, and cell survivability. The pressure exerted on the bio-ink during extrusion processes is measured analytically, and the information is incorporated in the bio-ink's rheology design. Cell-laden filaments are fabricated with multiple cell lines, i.e., Human Embryonic Kidney (HEK 293), BxPC3, and prostate cancer cells which are analyzed for cell viability. The cross-sectional live-dead assay of the extruded filament demonstrates a spatial pattern for HEK 293 cell viability, which correlates with our analytical finding of the shear stress at the nozzle tip. All three cell lines were able to sustain a transient shear stress of 3.7 kPa and demonstrate 90% viability with our designed bio-ink after 15 days of incubation. Simultaneously, the shape fidelity and printability matrices show its suitability for 3D bio-printing process.
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.