ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Development and validation of material selection method for cost-effective lab-scale 3D-printed platforms in biotechnology.
Article 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
Additive manufacturing is increasingly explored in microbial biotechnology, offering cost-effective, customizable, and scalable solutions. However, the lack of standardized methods for evaluating 3D-printed materials in microbial cultivation applications limits their broader adoption. This study proposes a reproducible framework to assess 3D-printed materials, integrating printability, autoclavability, mechanical testing (Shore D hardness and 3-point bending), and microbial biocompatibility testing. Five polylactic acid (PLA) filaments and twelve photopolymer resins were evaluated. Two polylactic acid filaments were identified as suitable for single-use applications, while a biocompatible photopolymer resin demonstrated potential for reusable components. Autoclaving emerged as the most critical step, eliminating half of the tested materials due to cracking or degradation. Notably, cost-efficient materials (e.g., eSun Standard Peach Pink and Elegoo plant-based Tough Grey resin) performed comparably to high-priced alternatives within the scope of microbial biotechnology. The method's applicability was validated by 3D-printing shake flasks using Fused Deposition Modelling and Stereolithography, which achieved microbial cultivation outcomes with
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.