ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2026
3D printing as an innovative tool in personalized management of complex airway diseases: a literature review.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Personalized medicine tailors interventions to a patient's unique anatomy and physiology. Three-dimensional printing (3DP) enables this precision for complex airway disease, including tracheal stenosis, tracheobronchomalacia, aerodigestive fistulas, and segmental defects, where conventional silicone or metallic stents and surgical reconstruction often fail to provide durable, anatomically congruent solutions. Tissue engineering and 3DP promise patient-specific devices and regenerative scaffolds that maintain patency, resist collapse, and minimize immunogenicity. This review synthesizes clinical and preclinical progress, highlighting materials, design strategies, biologic integration, and translational barriers. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed (January 1, 2015-June 1, 2025). Inclusion criteria encompassed studies utilizing 3DP to fabricate implantable devices for tracheobronchial reconstruction, with Key Content and Findings: From 808 records, 16 clinical and 56 preclinical studies were analyzed. Clinically, indirect 3DP with silicone or metallic alloys predominated, creating Y-stents or straight stents for post-lung transplant (LTx) stenosis, tracheobronchomalacia, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, malignant obstruction, and aerodigestive fistulas. 3DP technologies facilitate the synthesis of customized stents that can better conform to individual airway geometries, offering more precise therapeutic options than conventional one-size-fits-all devices. In parallel, preclinical studies aim to address the limitations observed within clinical settings by focusing on long-term, regenerative solutions. Preclinical studies focused on biodegradable scaffolds, commonly polycaprolactone (PCL), enhanced through surface modification or hybridization with hydrogels such as gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) or silk fibroin and bioactive factors like transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) or stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1). Bilayer constructs with epithelial and chondrogenic components supported epithelialization, cartilage formation, and vascularization. Advanced strategies such as exosome use, ferroptosis inhibition, and heterotopic preconditioning improved integration. Conclusions: 3DP enables anatomically tailored airway implants and promising regenerative scaffolds. Translation is limited by technical variability, regulatory complexity, and sparse long-term data. Standardized protocols, rigorous trials, and multidisciplinary collaboration are essential to bring 3DP airway reconstruction into clinical practice.
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.