Evidence mapPaperPMID 41440613Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025

An Overview of 3D Bioprinting Impact on Cell Viability: From Damage Assessment to Protection Solutions.

Sara Manzoli, Elena Merotto, Martina Piccoli, Pierangelo Gobbo, Silvia Todros, Piero G Pavan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Critical Systematic Review of 3D Bioprinting in Biomedicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors.

Sara ManzoliDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia 1, 35131 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-3514-4368
Elena MerottoDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia 1, 35131 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0009-0007-4598-0670
Martina PiccoliFondazione Istituto di Ricerca Pediatrica Città Della Speranza, Corso Stati Uniti, 4 F, 35127 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6211-0051
Pierangelo GobboDepartment of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Trieste, Via L. Giorgieri 1, 34127 Trieste, Italy.
Silvia TodrosDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia 1, 35131 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6077-9672
Piero G PavanDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia 1, 35131 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3875-9640

Funding

National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1.1, Call No. 1409 published on 14.9.2022 by the Italian Ministry of University and Research (MUR), funded by the European Union Next Generation EU CUP C53D23008360001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has become a widely exploited tissue engineering technique for producing functional constructs that can mimic and replace native tissues. To this end, different printing strategies can be adopted, including inkjet-based, light-assisted, and extrusion-based bioprinting. Despite the great improvements that these innovative techniques introduce, cell viability maintenance during and after the bioprinting process remains a challenging open question. Indeed, the reduction in cell viability is generally related to several crucial conditions during printing, such as high shear stresses and a nutrient-deficient environment of printed constructs. In this work, the current literature on 3D bioprinting technologies is reviewed, focusing on the level of cell damage that can be imparted during biomaterial printing. In particular, extrusion bioprinting, extrusion-associated shear stress and its impact on cell viability are described in detail. The simulation of the bioprinting process through computational fluid dynamics is proposed as an appropriate method to analyze the parameters involved during bioprinting. Moreover, the viability of cells encapsulated into bioink is discussed, as well as literature techniques aimed at enhancing it by both biomaterial modifications and cell micro-encapsulation.

Indexed as

bioink formulationbioprintingcell viabilityshear stress

Identifiers

PMID41440613
PMCPMC12733396

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.