Heterogeneous and Composite Bioinks for 3D-Bioprinting of Complex Tissue
Rasouli R., Sweeney C., Frampton JP.
Narrative Review, published in Biomed Mater Devices (2025) — 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
- Biomed Mater Devices (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40028238
- PMCID
- PMC11868245
- DOI
- 10.1007/s44174-024-00171-7
- Citations
- 18
Abstract (original English)
Bioink composition is a key consideration for the 3D-bioprinting of complex and stable structures used to model tissues and as tissue constructs for regenerative medicine. An emerging and industrially important area of research is the use of micro- and nanofillers to improve bioink performance without dramatically altering the physicochemical properties of the polymeric material that forms the bulk of the printed structure. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of emerging nanomaterial fillers designed to create heterogeneous and composite bioinks for 3D-bioprinting of complex functional tissues. We outline the criteria that must be considered when developing such a bioink and discuss applications where the fillers impart stimuli responsiveness, e.g., when exposed to magnetic fields, electrical fields, and light. We further highlight how the use of such fillers can enable non-destructive imaging to monitor scaffold placement and integrity following implantation.
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.