ReviewPolymers2025
Hydrogel-Based Bioinks for Coaxial and Triaxial Bioprinting: A Review of Material Properties, Printing Techniques, and Applications.
Review in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engineering Parameter Window for Filament Formation and Early-Stage Evolution in Embedded Printing of Gelatin/Alginate Hydrogels Within Carbomer Support Baths.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High-Performance Regenerated Silk Fibers as Building Blocks of Tissue Scaffolds: The European THOR Project.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Natural Polymers in Tissue Engineering and Regeneration: Material-Cell Mechanotransduction, Biofabrication Strategies, and Clinical Translation.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Design and Fabrication of Biomimetic Gradient Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds: Evolution from Single-Gradient to Multi-Gradient.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- One-Step Coaxial 3D Printing of Pre-Vascularized Skin Organoid Models with ADSC Microspheres for Enhanced Wound Healing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Multiscale 3D microfluidic platform for intraorganoid delivery.Research square · 2026Article
- Bioprinting Vascularized Constructs for Clinical Relevance: Engineering Hydrogel Systems for Biological Maturity.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Three-dimensional bioprinting technology has emerged as a rapidly advancing multidisciplinary field with significant potential for tissue engineering applications. This technology enables the formation of complex tissues and organs by utilizing hydrogels, with or without cells, as scaffolds or structural supports. Among various bioprinting methods, advanced bioprinting using coaxial and triaxial nozzles stands out as a promising technique. Coaxial bioprinting technique simultaneously deposits two material streams through a coaxial nozzle, enabling controlled formation of an outer shell and inner core construct. In contrast, triaxial bioprinting utilizes three material streams namely the outer shell, inner shell and inner core to fabricate more complex constructs. Despite the growing interest in 3D bioprinting, the development of suitable cell-laden bioinks for creating complex tissues remains unclear. To address this gap, a systematic review was conducted using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) flowchart, collecting 1621 papers from various databases, including Web of Science, PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Springer Link. After careful selection, 85 research articles focusing on coaxial and triaxial bioprinting were included in the review. Specifically, 77 research articles concentrated on coaxial bioprinting and 11 focused on triaxial bioprinting, with 3 covering both techniques. The search, conducted between 1 April and 30 September 2023, had no restrictions on publication date, and no meta-analyses were carried out due to the heterogeneity of studies. The primary objective of this review is to assess and identify the most commonly occurring cell-laden bioinks critical for successful advancements in bioprinting technologies. Specifically, the review focuses on delineating the commonly explored bioinks utilized in coaxial and triaxial bioprinting approaches. It focuses on evaluating the inherent merits of these bioinks, systematically comparing them while emphasizing their classifications, essential attributes, properties, and potential limitations within the domain of tissue engineering. Additionally, the review considers the applications of these bioinks, offering comprehensive insights into their efficacy and utility in the field of bioprinting technology. Overall, this review provides a comprehensive overview of some conditions of the relevant hydrogel bioinks used for coaxial and triaxial bioprinting of tissue constructs. Future research directions aimed at advancing the field are also briefly discussed.
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.