Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39056850›Full record

ReviewBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Fabrication Strategies for Bioceramic Scaffolds in Bone Tissue Engineering with Generative Design Applications.

Bilal Cinici, Sule Yaba, Mustafa Kurt, Huseyin C Yalcin, Liviu Duta, Oguzhan Gunduz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. A Brief Review on Biomimetics 3D Printing Design.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors.

Bilal CiniciDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Marmara University, Istanbul 34890, Turkey.
Sule YabaAYEM Innovation Anonim Sirketi, Cube Incubation Center, Technopark Istanbul, Istanbul 34890, Turkey.
Mustafa KurtDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Marmara University, Istanbul 34890, Turkey.
Huseyin C YalcinBiomedical Research Center, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0003-3825-9934
Liviu DutaLasers Department, National Institute for Lasers, Plasma and Radiation Physics, 077125 Magurele, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-6408-6056
Oguzhan GunduzCenter for Nanotechnology & Biomaterials Application and Research (NBUAM), Marmara University, Istanbul 34890, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-9427-7574

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the current state-of-the-art in the fabrication of bioceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering, with an emphasis on the use of three-dimensional (3D) technologies coupled with generative design principles. The field of modern medicine has witnessed remarkable advancements and continuous innovation in recent decades, driven by a relentless desire to improve patient outcomes and quality of life. Central to this progress is the field of tissue engineering, which holds immense promise for regenerative medicine applications. Scaffolds are integral to tissue engineering and serve as 3D frameworks that support cell attachment, proliferation, and differentiation. A wide array of materials has been explored for the fabrication of scaffolds, including bioceramics (i.e., hydroxyapatite, beta-tricalcium phosphate, bioglasses) and bioceramic-polymer composites, each offering unique properties and functionalities tailored to specific applications. Several fabrication methods, such as thermal-induced phase separation, electrospinning, freeze-drying, gas foaming, particle leaching/solvent casting, fused deposition modeling, 3D printing, stereolithography and selective laser sintering, will be introduced and thoroughly analyzed and discussed from the point of view of their unique characteristics, which have proven invaluable for obtaining bioceramic scaffolds. Moreover, by highlighting the important role of generative design in scaffold optimization, this review seeks to pave the way for the development of innovative strategies and personalized solutions to address significant gaps in the current literature, mainly related to complex bone defects in bone tissue engineering.

Indexed as

3D scaffoldbioceramicsbone tissue engineeringcompositesgenerative design

Identifiers

PMID39056850
PMCPMC11275129

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.