Article3D printing and additive manufacturing2025
Melt-Extrusion Additive Manufacturing for Tissue Engineering: Applications and Limitations.
Article in 3D printing and additive manufacturing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Additive Manufacturing of Biomaterials: Integrated Translational Ecosystems, Process-Structure-Property Interactions and Emerging Paradigms for Next-Generation Biomedical Engineering.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- An overview of recent flexible- and soft-biomaterial applications in myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular diseases.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- An Overview of Potential Applications of Environmentally Friendly Hybrid Polymeric Materials.Polymers · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of additive manufacturing techniques has increased over the years in almost all production fields, thanks to the possibility of creating objects from scratch and with the desired shape, with no need for molds or complex machinery typical of subtractive manufacturing. This success has concerned the biomedical world as well, where melt-based methods represent the golden standard to produce scaffolds for hard-tissue engineering. Despite the large number of studies present in the literature on scaffold production, the fabrication process is still affected by drawbacks and limitations, which hinders the standardization and upscaling to the industrial level. In this review, we briefly present the history of additive manufacturing and the reasons of its success, with particular reference to the tissue engineering and regenerative medicine world. We then proceed to highlight the current factors limiting the straightforwardness of the production process and affecting the quality and the performance of the manufactured scaffolds. Eventually, we suggest potential strategies to increase the level of control during manufacturing and to improve the biomimicry of the fabricated constructs, with the goal of obtaining a more optimal workflow.
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.