ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2023
Computational simulation-based comparative analysis of standard 3D printing and conical nozzles for pneumatic and piston-driven bioprinting.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbeam SAXS Reveals Flow-Induced Nanostructural Heterogeneity and Tilted Domains in 3D-Printed Block Copolymers.Macromolecules · 2026Article
- Computational approaches in bioprinting processes.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2026Article
- Task-specific computational fluid dynamics evaluation of multi-outlet extrusion nozzles for bioprinting.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- An Overview of 3D Bioprinting Impact on Cell Viability: From Damage Assessment to Protection Solutions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- From Medical Imaging to Bioprinted Tissues: The Importance of Workflow Optimisation for Improved Cell Function.Expert reviews in molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Machine Learning in Predicting and Optimizing Polymer Printability for 3D Bioprinting.Polymers · 2025Review
- Head and Neck 3D Bioprinting-A Review on Recent Advancements in Soft Tissue 3D Bioprinting and Medical Applications.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- A robotic arm with open-source reconstructive workflow forApplied physics reviews · 2024Article
- The cutting-edge progress in bioprinting for biomedicine: principles, applications, and future perspectives.MedComm · 2024Review
- Optimizing Printhead Design for Enhanced Temperature Control in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting.Micromachines · 2024Article
- Technology for the formation of engineered microvascular network models and their biomedical applications.Nano convergence · 2024Review
- Improving Cell Viability and Velocity in μ-Extrusion Bioprinting with a Novel Pre-Incubator Bioprinter and a Standard FDM 3D Printing Nozzle.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bioprinting is an application of additive manufacturing that can deliver promising results in regenerative medicine. Hydrogels, as the most used materials in bioprinting, are experimentally analyzed to assure printability and suitability for cell culture. Besides hydrogel features, the inner geometry of the microextrusion head might have an equal impact not only on printability but also on cellular viability. In this regard, standard 3D printing nozzles have been widely studied to reduce inner pressure and get faster printings using highly viscous melted polymers. Computational fluid dynamics is a useful tool capable of simulating and predicting the hydrogel behavior when the extruder inner geometry is modified. Hence, the objective of this work is to comparatively study the performance of a standard 3D printing and conical nozzles in a microextrusion bioprinting process through computational simulation. Three bioprinting parameters, namely pressure, velocity, and shear stress, were calculated using the level-set method, considering a 22G conical tip and a 0.4 mm nozzle. Additionally, two microextrusion models, pneumatic and piston-driven, were simulated using dispensing pressure (15 kPa) and volumetric flow (10 mm
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.