Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37273980›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2023

Comparison of the potential for bioprinting of different 3D printing technologies.

Jesús M Rodríguez-Rego, Laura Mendoza-Cerezo, Antonio Macías-García, Alfonso C Marcos-Romero, Juan P Carrasco-Amador

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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.

Jesús M Rodríguez-RegoDepartment of Graphic Expression, School of Industrial Engineering, University of Extremadura, Badajoz 06006, Spain.
Laura Mendoza-CerezoDepartment of Graphic Expression, School of Industrial Engineering, University of Extremadura, Badajoz 06006, Spain.
Antonio Macías-GarcíaDepartment of Mechanical, Energy and Materials Engineering, School of Industrial Engineering, University of Extremadura, Badajoz 06006, Spain.
Alfonso C Marcos-RomeroDepartment of Graphic Expression, School of Industrial Engineering, University of Extremadura, Badajoz 06006, Spain.
Juan P Carrasco-AmadorDepartment of Graphic Expression, School of Industrial Engineering, University of Extremadura, Badajoz 06006, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

3D printingBioprintingHydrogelMatrigelPCLPrintability

Identifiers

PMID37273980
PMCPMC10236351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.