Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

3D bioprinting of skin equivalents: Towards functional wound healing models

Perez-Barreto A., Moscalu R., Tremolada C., Domingos M., Reid A., Wong J.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, published in J Tissue Eng (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
J Tissue Eng (2026)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41924156
PMCID
PMC13036355
DOI
10.1177/20417314251407023

Abstract (original English)

Developing physiologically relevant human skin models remains a critical challenge in regenerative medicine and disease modelling, particularly for chronic wounds that involve persistent inflammation and vascular dysfunction. Recent advances in 3D bioprinting provide improved spatial organisation and reproducibility compared with other engineering strategies, enabling the fabrication of skin equivalents with increasing structural and cellular complexity. Nevertheless, most current models do not capture the dynamic crosstalk between immune and vascular systems, which is central to wound healing and tissue homoeostasis. This review surveys recent progress in engineering skin models that incorporate immune and vascular elements, and discusses the biological and technological barriers that continue to limit their integration. We also highlight emerging strategies, including organoids, 4D bioprinting, and computational approaches, that may enable next-generation platforms. By more accurately modelling the wound microenvironment, such advances could accelerate translation from laboratory innovation to clinical application.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research