SynthesisFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
3D-printed scaffold-based strategies for enthesis regeneration: a systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The enthesis is a specialized transitional tissue that enables load transfer between tendon and bone through a graded tendon-fibrocartilage-bone interface. Following injury or surgical repair, regeneration of the native enthesis remains challenging, often resulting in mechanically inferior fibrous scar tissue. Additively manufactured three-dimensional (3D) scaffolds have emerged as a promising strategy to recreate the structural and biological complexity of the tendon-bone interface. This systematic review evaluated the current preclinical evidence on 3D scaffold-based approaches for enthesis regeneration. Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261388606). PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 13 February 2026. Original preclinical studies investigating additively manufactured 3D scaffold-based strategies for tendon-bone interface or enthesis regeneration were included. Data regarding scaffold design, biological augmentation, and Results: Nine preclinical animal studies published between 2019 and 2025 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies used rabbit rotator cuff repair models. Polymer-based scaffolds, particularly polycaprolactone and poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid), were the most frequently used materials. Advanced architectures included gradient, multiphasic, bioprinted, and coaxial constructs, often combined with mesenchymal stem cells, growth factors, or controlled-release systems. Across studies, scaffold-based strategies consistently promoted enhanced lineage-specific differentiation, fibrocartilage formation, collagen organization, and interface maturation compared with controls. Biomechanical testing demonstrated improved ultimate load, stiffness, tensile strength, or energy absorption in all experimental groups. Constructs combining biomimetic architecture with biological augmentation generally achieved good outcomes, although regenerated interfaces remained inferior to native tissue. Risk-of-bias assessment showed overall unclear methodological quality due to insufficient reporting. Conclusion: Additively manufactured 3D scaffold-based strategies show promise for improving enthesis regeneration in preclinical models. Constructs integrating spatially organized architecture with controlled biological signaling demonstrated the most favorable structural and biomechanical outcomes. However, current evidence is limited to heterogeneous short-term animal studies, and complete restoration of native enthesis structure and function has not yet been achieved.
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.