Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37376340›Full record

ReviewPolymers2023

3D Bioprinting of Hyaline Articular Cartilage: Biopolymers, Hydrogels, and Bioinks.

Larisa T Volova, Gennadiy P Kotelnikov, Igor Shishkovsky, Dmitriy B Volov, Natalya Ossina, Nikolay A Ryabov, Aleksey V Komyagin, Yeon Ho Kim, Denis G Alekseev

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Larisa T VolovaResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Gennadiy P KotelnikovResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Igor ShishkovskySkolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow 121205, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-4404-9020
Dmitriy B VolovResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Natalya OssinaResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Nikolay A RyabovResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Aleksey V KomyaginResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.
Yeon Ho KimRokitHealth Care Ltd., 9, Digital-ro 10-gil, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul 08514, Republic of Korea.
Denis G AlekseevResearch and Development Institute of Biotechnologies, Samara State Medical University, Chapayevskaya St. 89, 443099 Samara, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-4185-0709
Samara State Medical University · RUSkolkovo Institute of Science and Technology · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The musculoskeletal system, consisting of bones and cartilage of various types, muscles, ligaments, and tendons, is the basis of the human body. However, many pathological conditions caused by aging, lifestyle, disease, or trauma can damage its elements and lead to severe disfunction and significant worsening in the quality of life. Due to its structure and function, articular (hyaline) cartilage is the most susceptible to damage. Articular cartilage is a non-vascular tissue with constrained self-regeneration capabilities. Additionally, treatment methods, which have proven efficacy in stopping its degradation and promoting regeneration, still do not exist. Conservative treatment and physical therapy only relieve the symptoms associated with cartilage destruction, and traditional surgical interventions to repair defects or endoprosthetics are not without serious drawbacks. Thus, articular cartilage damage remains an urgent and actual problem requiring the development of new treatment approaches. The emergence of biofabrication technologies, including three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting, at the end of the 20th century, allowed reconstructive interventions to get a second wind. Three-dimensional bioprinting creates volume constraints that mimic the structure and function of natural tissue due to the combinations of biomaterials, living cells, and signal molecules to create. In our case-hyaline cartilage. Several approaches to articular cartilage biofabrication have been developed to date, including the promising technology of 3D bioprinting. This review represents the main achievements of such research direction and describes the technological processes and the necessary biomaterials, cell cultures, and signal molecules. Special attention is given to the basic materials for 3D bioprinting-hydrogels and bioinks, as well as the biopolymers underlying the indicated products.

Indexed as

biofabricationbioinksbiopolymersbioprinterscellshyaline articular cartilagehydrogelsregenerative medicinescaffoldssignal moleculesthree-dimensional bioprintingtissue engineeringtraumatology and orthopaedics

Identifiers

PMID37376340
PMCPMC10301829
OpenAlexW4380991001

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.