ReviewBiomedical engineering letters2024
3D printing technology and its combination with nanotechnology in bone tissue engineering.
Review in Biomedical engineering letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application and prospects of nanomaterials in osteoporosis treatment.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Review
- Hydrogels for Bone Repair: Construction Strategies and Applications.Smart medicine · 2026Review
- Research progress of 3D-printed PLGA scaffolds for the treatment of bone defects.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Review
- The Application of Biologic and Synthetic Bone Grafts in Scoliosis Surgery: A Scoping Review of Emerging Technologies.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advances in 3D printing technology for preparing bone tissue engineering scaffolds from biodegradable materials.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the graying of the world's population, the morbidity of age-related chronic degenerative bone diseases, such as osteoporosis and osteoarthritis, is increasing yearly, leading to an increased risk of bone defects, while current treatment methods face many problems, such as shortage of grafts and an incomplete repair. Therefore, bone tissue engineering offers an alternative solution for regenerating and repairing bone tissues by constructing bioactive scaffolds with porous structures that provide mechanical support to damaged bone tissue while promoting angiogenesis and cell adhesion, proliferation, and activity. 3D printing technology has become the primary scaffold manufacturing method due to its ability to precisely control the internal pore structure and complex spatial shape of bone scaffolds. In contrast, the fast development of nanotechnology has provided more possibilities for the internal structure and biological function of scaffolds. This review focuses on the application of 3D printing technology in bone tissue engineering and nanotechnology in the field of bone tissue regeneration and repair, and explores the prospects for the integration of the two technologies.
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.