ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
3D-bioprinting for joint regeneration.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joint injuries represent a significant clinical challenge with limited regenerative options. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has emerged as a transformative technology, enabling the precise fabrication of patient-specific, anatomically matched, multilayered scaffolds that replicate the complex structure and gradient of natural joint tissues. This review comprehensively summarizes advances in bioprinting techniques, cell sources, and biomaterial formulations, emphasizing cell-laden bioinks composed of biomaterials and viable cells to create functional, bioactive constructs. Beyond basic fabrication, we evaluate the functional performance of bioprinted cartilage, bone, and ligaments, and we discuss strategies for engineering osteochondral interfaces and ligament-bone interfaces to support biomimetic mechanical properties and tissue integration. We further compare major printing modalities, including extrusion-based printing, inkjet, and laser-assisted bioprinting, and we discuss how modality-specific trade-offs in resolution, viscosity window, and cell stress influence construct fidelity and repair outcomes. In addition, we examine biofunctionalization strategies that incorporate growth factors, stem cells, and exosomes to enhance regenerative signaling and matrix remodeling. Notably, 3D bioprinting for joint regeneration is transitioning from bench to bedside, and we detail the current landscape of clinical translation, including commercialized products like Nanochon and active clinical trials for knee and hip repair. However, challenges such as insufficient vascularization and the mechanical performance of the printed constructions remain significant hurdles for clinical translation. Overall, this work underscores the potential of personalized 3D bioprinted scaffolds to advance joint tissue engineering and clarifies key directions for integrating these technologies 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.