ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2023
Comparison of the potential for bioprinting of different 3D printing technologies.
Article in International journal of bioprinting, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the hydrogels Matrigel, Biogelx, PLTMAx and GelMA in the generation of minilungs from human embryonic stem cells (hESC).Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- Immiscible Phase Separation-Driven Microfabrication of Gelatin Methacryloyl Scaffolds for BMP-2 Delivery and Osteogenic Enhancement.Macromolecular bioscience · 2025Article
- Recent advances in hydrogel-assisted treatment of malignant bone tumors.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Tissue Engineering In Vitro Leaflet- and 3-Dimensional Printing-Based Implant Prototypes for Infant Mitral Valve.BME frontiers · 2025Article
- Formation of Stable Vascular Networks by 3D Coaxial Printing and Schiff-Based Reaction.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Photocuring 3D printing technology as an advanced tool for promoting angiogenesis in hypoxia-related diseases.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
26Additive manufacturing technologies offer a multitude of medical applications due to the advances in the development of the materials used to reproduce customized model products. The main problem with these technologies is obtaining the correct cell viability values, and it is where three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting emerges as a very interesting tool that should be studied extensively, as it has significant disadvantages with respect to printability. In this work, the comparison of 3D bioprinting technology in hydrogels and thermoplastics for the development of biomimetic parts is proposed. To this end, the study of the printability of different materials widely used in the literature is proposed, to subsequently test and analyze the parameters that indicate whether these materials could be used to obtain a biomimetic structure with structural guarantees. In order to analyze the materials studied, different tools have been designed to facilitate the quantitative characterization of their printability using 3D printing. For this purpose, different structures have been developed and a characterization methodology has been followed to quantify the printability value of each material in each test to subsequently discard the materials that do not obtain a minimum value in the result. After the study, it was found that only gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) 5% could generate biomimetic structures faithful to the designed 3D model. Furthermore, by comparing the printing results of the different materials used in 3D bioprinting and consequently establishing the approach of different strategies, it is shown that hydrogels need to be further developed to match the results achieved by thermoplastic materials used for bioprinting.
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.