ReviewInternational journal of ophthalmology2023
Three-dimensional bioprinting in ophthalmic care.
Review in International journal of ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D bioprinting innovations: a new frontier in breast cancer research.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Review
- Risk of Permanent Corneal Injury in Microgravity: Spaceflight-Associated Hazards, Challenges to Vision Restoration, and Role of Biotechnology in Long-Term Planetary Missions.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting: A Comprehensive Review for Applications in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is widely used in ophthalmic clinic, including in diagnosis, surgery, prosthetics, medications, drug development and delivery, and medical education. Articles published in 2011-2022 into bioinks, printing technologies, and bioprinting applications in ophthalmology were reviewed and the strengths and limitations of bioprinting in ophthalmology highlighted. The review highlighted the trade-offs of printing technologies and bioinks in respect to, among others, material type cost, throughput, gelation technique, cell density, cell viability, resolution, and printing speed. There is already widespread ophthalmological application of bioprinting outside clinical settings, including in educational modelling, retinal imaging/visualization techniques and drug design/testing. In clinical settings, bioprinting has already found application in pre-operatory planning. Even so, the findings showed that even with its immense promise, actual translation to clinical applications remains distant, but relatively closer for the corneal (except stromal) tissues, epithelium, endothelium, and conjunctiva, than it was for the retina. This review similarly reflected on the critical on the technical, practical, ethical, and cost barrier to rapid progress of bioprinting in ophthalmology, including accessibility to the most sophisticated bioprinting technologies, choice, and suitability of bioinks, tissue viability and storage conditions. The extant research is encouraging, but more work is clearly required for the push towards clinical translation of research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.