ReviewPolymers2025
Therapeutic Applications of 3D Bioprinting in Surgery for Female Reproductive Tract Disorders: A Systematic Review.
Review in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Three-dimensional printing has been progressively integrated into various industries, particularly the medical sector, where its significance in tissue engineering for transplantation is growing exponentially. The purpose of this systematic review is to ascertain whether the bioprinting of scaffolds holds the potential to provide treatment for pathologies within the female reproductive system. The inclusion criteria applied were the bioimprinting of the ovary, uterus, endometrium, or vagina, intended for surgical implantation in the patient. Articles employing printing methods that do not incorporate cells embedded in the material, those that generate tissue other than that of the female reproductive system, and those that print structures with in vitro applications were excluded from the review. The search for relevant articles was conducted until 3 April 2025. After analyzing 667 articles extracted from PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, 13 articles were included in this review. The analysis of the results encompassed aspects related to the bioprinting technology employed, the hydrogels and cells utilized, as well as the bioprinted structure and the corresponding target tissue. Few studies investigated the creation of a multicellular scaffold and in none of the cases was it implanted in a large animal model, only in murine and rabbit models. These articles reaffirm the feasibility of employing 3D bioprinting to fabricate tissues and functional organs in the present and future. This advancement will revolutionize the future demand for organs for transplantation.
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.