Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39309029›Full record

ArticleTrends in food science & technology2024

A narrative review: 3D bioprinting of cultured muscle meat and seafood products and its potential for the food industry.

Mediha Gurel, Nikheel Rathod, Laura Y Cabrera, Stephen Voyton, Miji Yeo, Fatih Ozogul, Ibrahim T Ozbolat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in food science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Edible Scaffolds for Cultivated Meat Production.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors.

Mediha GurelBiotechnology Research and Application Center, Cukurova University, 01330, Adana, Turkey.
Nikheel RathodDepartment of Post Harvest Management of Meat, Poultry and Fish, Post-graduate Institute of Post-harvest Management (Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth), Raigad, 402116, India.
Laura Y CabreraRock Ethics Institute, Penn State University, University Park, 16802, USA.
Stephen VoytonEngineering Science and Mechanics Department, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Miji YeoEngineering Science and Mechanics Department, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Fatih OzogulBiotechnology Research and Application Center, Cukurova University, 01330, Adana, Turkey.
Ibrahim T OzbolatEngineering Science and Mechanics Department, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.

Funding

Intraoperative bioprinting of composite tissues with zonal stratification for craniomaxillofacial reconstructionR01DE028614 · NIDCR · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI OZBOLAT, IBRAHIM · 2020 to 2024
$2.8M
Developing in situ transcriptomics of a bioprinted follicular skin modelR21AR082668 · NIAMS · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI OH, JULIA, OZBOLAT, IBRAHIM · 2023 to 2023
$439k
NIAMS NIH HHS R21 AR082668NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE028614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The demand for meat and seafood products has been globally increasing for decades. To address the environmental, social, and economic impacts of this trend, there has been a surge in the development of three-dimensional (3D) food bioprinting technologies for lab-grown muscle food products and their analogues. This innovative approach is a sustainable solution to mitigate the environmental risks associated with climate change caused by the negative impacts of indiscriminative livestock production and industrial aquaculture. This review article explores the adoption of 3D bioprinting modalities to manufacture lab-grown muscle food products and their associated technologies, cells, and bioink formulations. Additionally, various processing techniques, governing the characteristics of bioprinted food products, nutritional compositions, and safety aspects as well as its relevant ethical and social considerations, were discussed. Although promising, further research and development is needed to meet standards and translate into several industrial areas, such as the food and renewable energy industries. In specific, optimization of animal cell culture conditions, development of serum-free media, and bioreactor design are essential to eliminate the risk factors but achieve the unique nutritional requirements and consumer acceptance. In short, the advancement of 3D bioprinting technologies holds great potential for transforming the food industry, but achieving widespread adoption will require continued innovation, rigorous research, and adherence to ethical standards to ensure safety, nutritional quality, and consumer acceptance.

Indexed as

3D BioprintingCultured MeatLab-grown MeatMeat BioprintingMuscle Food BioprintingSeafood Bioprinting

Identifiers

PMID39309029
PMCPMC11412102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.