ReviewAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2026
Soft Robotics and Advanced Technologies for Minimally Invasive Bioprinting: The Future of Internal Organ Repair.
Review in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Injectable Hydrogels for Local Pharmacokinetic Control in Solid Tumors: From Passive Reservoirs to Stimulus-Responsive Exposure Systems.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026Review
- Robust displacement estimation from filament-based soft sensors using a parallel attention-enhanced LSTM for rehabilitation monitoring.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bioprinting, first proposed in the 1980s for ex vivo tissue fabrication, has evolved into a cornerstone of regenerative medicine. Conventional approaches rely on printing tissues outside the body for later implantation but are limited by geometric mismatch, construct fragility, and invasive surgery. In situ bioprinting addresses these limitations by depositing cells and biomaterials directly at defect sites, enabling patient-specific repair and improved tissue integration. Building on this paradigm, Minimally Invasive Bioprinting (MIB) targets internal organ regeneration through small incisions or natural orifices. This review defines a technological roadmap from handheld bioprinting tools to advanced MIB systems, identifying soft robotics as the primary hardware enabler for navigation within confined anatomical environments. We examine essential technology pillars for MIB, including soft actuation, sensing, real-time imaging, computational modeling, intelligent control, and bioink engineering. The integration of emerging approaches such as artificial intelligence, four-dimensional bioprinting, and organ-on-a-chip platforms is discussed for enhancing autonomy, adaptability, and functional outcomes. Finally, we evaluate key translational challenges, including safety, scalability, and reproducibility, and outline regulatory considerations for clinical implementation. Overall, integrating soft robotic mechanisms with in situ bioprinting is critical for achieving safe, high-fidelity, patient-specific internal organ repair in minimally invasive clinical settings worldwide for future practice applications.
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.