Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36816674›Full record

ReviewACS omega2023

Strategies To Modify the Surface and Bulk Properties of 3D-Printed Solid Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications.

Ruchira Chakraborty, Abhijeet Govind Anoop, Abhay Thakur, Girish Chandra Mohanta, Prasoon Kumar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS omega, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

5 authors.

Ruchira ChakrabortyBiodesign and Medical Device Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Medical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela 769008, India.
Abhijeet Govind AnoopBiodesign and Medical Device Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Medical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela 769008, India.
Abhay ThakurBiodesign and Medical Device Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Medical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela 769008, India.
Girish Chandra MohantaMaterials Science and Sensor Applications Division, CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments Organizations (CSIR-CSIO), Chandigarh 160030, India.
Prasoon KumarBiodesign and Medical Device Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Medical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela 769008, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0854-3889

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

3D printing is one of the effective scaffold fabrication techniques that emerged in the 21st century that has the potential to revolutionize the field of tissue engineering. The solid scaffolds developed by 3D printing are still one of the most sought-after approaches for developing hard-tissue regeneration and repair. However, applications of these solid scaffolds get limited due to their poor surface and bulk properties, which play a significant role in tissue integration, loadbearing, antimicrobial/antifouling properties, and others. As a result, several efforts have been directed to modify the surface and bulk of these solid scaffolds. These modifications have significantly improved the adoption of 3D-printed solid scaffolds and devices in the healthcare industry. Nevertheless, the in vivo implant applications of these 3D-printed solid scaffolds/devices are still under development. They require attention in terms of their surface/bulk properties, which dictate their functionality. Therefore, in the current review, we have discussed different 3D-printing parameters that facilitate the fabrication of solid scaffolds/devices with different properties. Further, changes in the bulk properties through material and microstructure modification are also being discussed. After that, we deliberated on the techniques that modify the surfaces through chemical and material modifications. The computational approaches for the bulk modification of these 3D-printed materials are also mentioned, focusing on tissue engineering. We have also briefly discussed the application of these solid scaffolds/devices in tissue engineering. Eventually, the review is concluded with an analysis of the choice of surface/bulk modification based on the intended application in tissue engineering.

Identifiers

PMID36816674
PMCPMC9933196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.