ArticleAdvanced healthcare materials2024
Enhancing Craniofacial Bone Reconstruction with Clinically Applicable 3D Bioprinted Constructs.
Article in Advanced healthcare materials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Cells · 2026Review
- A low-cost imaging platform for quantitative characterisation of scaffold surface macrotopography with potential application in craniofacial tissue engineering.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- A click-crosslinked dopamine-functionalized hydrogel for therapeutic delivery of stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles.Biomaterials science · 2026Article
- Biofabrication for complex tissue regeneration: a scoping review of translational gaps in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Three-dimensional bioprinted organoids: advances and clinical translation.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Review
- Biomimetic Strategies for Bone Regeneration: Smart Scaffolds and Multiscale Cues.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The feasibility of 3D bioprinting for bone regeneration: key challenges and future directions.Regenerative medicine · 2025Review
- 3D Bioprinting for Engineered Tissue Constructs and Patient-Specific Models: Current Progress and Prospects in Clinical Applications.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2024Review
- Enhancing Craniofacial Bone Reconstruction with Clinically Applicable 3D Bioprinted Constructs.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Medical imaging and 3D bioprinting can be used to create patient-specific bone scaffolds with complex shapes and controlled inner architectures. This study investigated the effectiveness of a biomimetic approach to scaffold design by employing geometric control. The biomimetic scaffold with a dense external layer showed improved bone regeneration compared to the control scaffold. New bone filled the defected region in the biomimetic scaffolds, while the control scaffolds only presented new bone at the boundary. Histological examination also shows effective bone regeneration in the biomimetic scaffolds, while fibrotic tissue ingrowth is observed in the control scaffolds. These findings suggest that the biomimetic bone scaffold, designed to minimize competition for fibrotic tissue formation in the bony defect, can enhance bone regeneration. This study underscores the notion that patient-specific anatomy can be accurately translated into a 3D bioprinting strategy through medical imaging, leading to the fabrication of constructs with significant clinical relevance.
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.