ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Additive Manufacturing of Biomaterials: Integrated Translational Ecosystems, Process-Structure-Property Interactions and Emerging Paradigms for Next-Generation Biomedical Engineering.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
Additive manufacturing (AM) has expanded the design space of biomaterials for biomedical engineering, enabling patient-specific geometries, controlled porosity, multi-material constructs and cell-compatible fabrication. However, clinical translation remains constrained by a mismatch between fabrication capability and biological, mechanical and regulatory performance. Unlike reviews focused on individual material families, isolated AM routes or specific applications, this review interprets AM of biomaterials as an integrated biomaterial-process-structure-property-translation ecosystem. It examines how material chemistry, feedstock state, printing route, architecture, post-processing and biological response jointly determine the reliability of acellular and cellular constructs, with particular emphasis on clinically relevant performance, reproducibility and long-term safety. Metallic, ceramic, polymeric, hydrogel-based and composite biomaterials are analysed alongside binder jetting (BJ), directed energy deposition (DED), material extrusion (ME) and jetting (MJ), powder bed fusion (PBF), VAT photopolymerisation and bioprinting. The review identifies recurring challenges across routes, including restricted material-process compatibility, limited prediction of process-structure-property relationships, post-processing-induced changes in biological performance, insufficient standardisation of printability and biofunctionality metrics, incomplete validation of cell-laden and vascularised constructs and weak transfer of laboratory protocols to clinically robust workflows. The main conclusion is that progress will depend less on expanding printable geometries alone and more on integrated optimisation of materials, processing windows, structural fidelity, biological validation, quality assurance and translational readiness. This ecosystem-level perspective provides a framework for evaluating limitations and defining future priorities in AM-based biomaterials for regenerative medicine, implants and precision biomedical engineering.
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.