Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40260017›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Mechanical and biological properties of 3D printed bone tissue engineering scaffolds.

Mingxuan Wang, Yunpeng Xu, Luoxi Cao, Le Xiong, Depeng Shang, Yang Cong, Dan Zhao, Xiaowei Wei, Junlei Li, Dapeng Fu and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. [Applications and prospects of biodegradable rare earth magnesium alloys as bone implant materials].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors.

Mingxuan Wang *Orthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Yunpeng Xu *Orthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Luoxi CaoOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Le XiongOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Depeng ShangOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Yang CongOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Dan ZhaoOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Xiaowei WeiOrthopaedic Medical Research Center, Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Junlei LiOrthopaedic Medical Research Center, Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Dapeng FuOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Haoyi LianOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Zhenhua ZhaoOrthopaedic Department, Affiliated ZhongShan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone defects have historically represented a significant challenge in clinical practice, with traditional surgical intervention remaining the gold standard for their management. However, due to the problem of the origin of autologous and allogeneic bone and the complex and diverse bone defects, traditional surgical methods sometimes cannot meet the treatment needs and expectations of patients. The development of bone tissue engineering and 3D printing technology provides new ideas for bone defect repair. Ideal bioscaffold materials must have good mechanical properties, biocompatibility, osteoinduction and bone conduction capabilities. Additionally, factors such as degradation rate, appropriate porosity and a sustained antibacterial effect must be taken into account. The combination of 3D printing technology and synthetic composite biomaterial scaffolds has become a well-established approach in the treatment of complex bone defects, offering innovative solutions for bone defect repair. The combined application of seed cells, signalling factors and biological scaffolds is also beneficial to improve the therapeutic effect of complex bone defects. This article will therefore examine some of the most commonly used 3D printing technologies for biological scaffolds and the most prevalent bioscaffold materials suitable for 3D printing. An analysis will be conducted on the mechanical and biological properties of these materials to elucidate their respective advantages and limitations.

Indexed as

3D printingbiocompatibilitybiological scaffoldsbone defectbone tissue engineeringmechanical strengthmechanical strength 3D printingmesenchymal stem cell

Identifiers

PMID40260017
PMCPMC12010109

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.