Bioprinting and Differentiation of Stem Cells
Irvine SA., Venkatraman SS.
Narrative Review, published in Molecules (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Molecules (2016)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 27617991
- PMCID
- PMC6273261
- DOI
- 10.3390/molecules21091188
- Citations
- 79
Abstract (original English)
The 3D bioprinting of stem cells directly into scaffolds offers great potential for the development of regenerative therapies; in particular for the fabrication of organ and tissue substitutes. For this to be achieved; the lineage fate of bioprinted stem cell must be controllable. Bioprinting can be neutral; allowing culture conditions to trigger differentiation or alternatively; the technique can be designed to be stimulatory. Such factors as the particular bioprinting technique; bioink polymers; polymer cross-linking mechanism; bioink additives; and mechanical properties are considered. In addition; it is discussed that the stimulation of stem cell differentiation by bioprinting may lead to the remodeling and modification of the scaffold over time matching the concept of 4D bioprinting. The ability to tune bioprinting properties as an approach to fabricate stem cell bearing scaffolds and to also harness the benefits of the cells multipotency is of considerable relevance to the field of biomaterials and bioengineering.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.