ArticlePloS one2025
FRESH extrusion 3D printing of type-1 collagen hydrogels photocrosslinked using ruthenium.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Additive Manufacturing of Engineered Tissue Constructs: Current Strategies and Future Directions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Unconventional bioprinting modalities for advanced tissue biofabrication.Biomaterials · 2026Review
- Standalone methacrylated extracellular matrix for digital light processing bioprinting: a practical workflow.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Correction: FRESH extrusion 3D printing of type-1 collagen hydrogels photocrosslinked using ruthenium.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The extrusion bioprinting of collagen material has many applications relevant to tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Freeform Reversible Embedding of Suspended Hydrogels (FRESH) technology is capable of 3D printing collagen material with the specifications and details needed for precise tissue guidance, a crucial requirement for effective tissue repair. While FRESH has shown repeated success and reliability for extrusion printing, the mechanical properties of completed collagen prints can be improved further by post-print crosslinking methodologies. Photoinitiator-based crosslinking methods are simple and have proven effective in strengthening protein-based materials. The ruthenium and sodium persulfate photoinitiator system (Ru(bpy)3/SPS) has been suggested as an effective crosslinking method for collagen materials. Herein, we describe the procedure our group has developed to combine extrusion-based 3D printing of type-1 collagen using FRESH technology with Ru(bpy)3/SPS photoinitiated crosslinking methods to improve the strength and stability of 3D printed collagen structures. Mechanical testing and cell biocompatibility assessments were performed to investigate the impact of Ru(bpy)3/SPS photoinitiated crosslinking and highlight the potential limitations of this method. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in the compressive strength of type-1 collagen samples as the Ru(bpy)3/SPS concentration increases. Additionally, type-1 collagen samples crosslinked with up to 1/10 mM Ru(bpy)3/SPS support PC12 cell viability over a period of 7 days. The primary limitations that were observed and described in detail in this protocol are: the FRESH slurry preparation, printing environment, extrusion printer hardware, and quality of the ruthenium reagent.
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.