ReviewBone2023
Current advancements in bio-ink technology for cartilage and bone tissue engineering.
Review in Bone, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Bioprinting for craniofacial reconstruction: A review of advancements, clinical use, and challenges.Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2025Review
- Biological Augmentation of Meniscal Repair: A Review with Insights into Injectable Hydrogel Delivery.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Rheological, Structural, and Biological Trade-Offs in Bioink Design for 3D Bioprinting.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Enhanced Cartilage Regeneration: Chemical, Mechanical, and In Vitro Analysis of Innovative TiOACS omega · 2025Article
- Innovative 3D printing technologies and advanced materials revolutionizing orthopedic surgery: current applications and future directions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- 3D-printed constructs deliver bioactive cargos to expedite cartilage regeneration.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2024Review
- Gelatin-Sodium Alginate Hydrogels Cross-Linked by Squaric Acid and Dialdehyde Starch as a Potential Bio-Ink.Polymers · 2024Article
- Fabrication of Bilayer Nanofibrous-Hydrogel Scaffold fromACS omega · 2024Article
- Aerogel-Based Materials in Bone and Cartilage Tissue Engineering-A Review with Future Implications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Biomaterial-based scaffolds in promotion of cartilage regeneration: Recent advances and emerging applications.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2023Review
- Bioprinting-Enabled Biomaterials: A Cutting-Edge Strategy for Future Osteoarthritis Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Review
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
Abstract
In tissue engineering, the fate of a particular organ/tissue regeneration and repair mainly depends on three pillars - 3D architecture, cells used, and stimulus provided. 3D cell supportive structure development is one of the crucial pillars necessary for defining organ/tissue geometry and shape. In recent years, the advancements in 3D bio-printing (additive manufacturing) made it possible to develop very precise 3D architectures with the help of industrial software like Computer-Aided Design (CAD). The main requirement for the 3D printing process is the bio-ink, which can act as a source for cell support, proliferation, drug (growth factors, stimulators) delivery, and organ/tissue shape. The selection of the bio-ink depends upon the type of 3D tissue of interest. Printing tissues like bone and cartilage is always challenging because it is difficult to find printable biomaterial that can act as bio-ink and mimic the strength of the natural bone and cartilage tissues. This review describes different biomaterials used to develop bio-inks with different processing variables and cell-seeding densities for bone and cartilage 3D printing applications. The review also discusses the advantages, limitations, and cell bio-ink compatibility in each biomaterial section. The emphasis is given to bio-inks reported for 3D printing cartilage and bone and their applications in orthopedics and orthodontists. The critical/important performance and the architectural morphology requirements of desired bone and cartilage bio-inks were compiled in summary.
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.