ReviewACS omega2024
Prioritizing Biomaterial Driven Clinical Bioactivity Over Designing Intricacy during Bioprinting of Trabecular Microarchitecture: A Clinician's Perspective.
Review in ACS omega, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone tissue engineering has witnessed a historical shift from three perspectives. From a biomaterial perspective, materials have now become smarter and dynamic; from a bioengineering perspective the bioprinting techniques have now advanced to 4D bioprinting; and from a clinical perspective scaffold bioactivity has progressed toward enhanced osteoinductive scaffolds driven by intricate biomechanical, biophysical, biochemical, and biological cues. Though all of these advancements are indicative of improvised scaffold engineering, a pivotal question regarding the critical role and need of designing and replicating the intricacies of trabecular microarchitecture for enhanced, clinically appreciable osteoangiogenicity needs to be answered. This review hence critically evaluates the rationale and the need of investing substantial effort into designing complex microarchitectures amidst the era of "smart biomaterials" and dynamic 4D bioprinting aimed toward enhancing clinically appreciable bioactivity. The article explores the concept of integrating intricate designs into a scaffold microarchitecture to bolster bioactivity and the practical challenges encountered in 3D bioprinting of complex designs and meticulously examines the pivotal role of biomaterials in scaffold bioactivity, proposing a comprehensive approach to bioprinting geared toward achieving clinical bioactivity and striking a judicious balance between design intricacy and functional outcomes in bone bioprinting.
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.