Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39904058›Full record

ReviewProgress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England)2025

Extrusion bioprinting: meeting the promise of human tissue biofabrication?

Ian Holland

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Ian HollandInstitute for Bioengineering, School of Engineering, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8728-7117

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extrusion is the most popular bioprinting platform. Predictions of human tissue and whole-organ printing have been made for the technology. However, after decades of development, extruded constructs lack the essential microscale resolution and heterogeneity observed in most human tissues. Extrusion bioprinting has had little clinical impact with the majority of research directed away from the tissues most needed by patients. The distance between promise and reality is a result of technology hype and inherent design flaws that limit the shape, scale and survival of extruded features. By more widely adopting resolution innovations and softening its ambitions the biofabrication field could define a future for extrusion bioprinting that more closely aligns with its capabilities.

Indexed as

BioprintingPrinting, Three-DimensionalTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsHumansbiofabricationextrusion bioprintingorgan printingtechnology hype

Identifiers

PMID39904058
PMCPMC11894458

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.