ReviewMaterials today. Bio2026
Advances in extrusion-based bioprinting enabled by advanced printhead and nozzle designs.
Review in Materials today. Bio, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Toward 4D Biomaterials: Comparing Electrospun and 3D-Printed Shape-Memory Scaffolds.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
3D printing is a rapidly evolving technology that enables new applications in biomedical engineering. In particular, its role in the fabrication of complex living tissues and multimaterial structures that support living cells opens new possibilities for biomaterial processing as well as potential clinical applications. Among the various 3D printing modalities developed over recent decades, extrusion-based printing shows particular promise for bioprinting and a number of successful examples are highlighted in this review. However, despite its widespread adoption, extrusion-based 3D printing is constrained by the limited range of viscoelasticities that can be processed, certain inefficiencies in multi-material printing, restricted spatial resolution and fundamental trade-offs between printing speed and cell viability in bioprinting applications. Here, we present a comprehensive review of existing printhead designs for extrusion-based 3D printing, with a specific focus on biomedical applications. We highlight recent technological breakthroughs, identify persistent bottlenecks and propose strategic directions for next-generation printhead development aimed at overcoming current limitations. Our goal is to catalyze innovation in printhead engineering for biomedical applications to enable the fabrication of structures that are still unattainable with current extrusion-based 3D printing systems.
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.