Bioprinting represents the transformative approach to additive manufacturing, specifically in fabricating scaffolds and tissue constructs. While notable advancements have been made in fabricating organ tissues and neural tissues, challenges persist regarding optimized printability conditions, mechanical properties, and cell viability. This study uniquely integrates computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and finite element analysis (FEA) to refine bioprinting parameters and enhance scaffold performance. Advanced bio-printed techniques are investigated for their ability to produce high precision and improved cell viability. The main objective of this study is to present a simulation-driven approach to bioprinting that refines both biological and mechanical properties. A discussion is conducted about the bioprinting methods and the simulation conditions employed to optimize the outcomes of the bioprinting process. Additionally, applications of bioprinting in various fields are presented. Conclusively, integrating simulation techniques with bioprinting enhances mechanical properties and cell viability, accelerating innovation in bioprinting.
JiangZ, JinB, LiangZ, . Liver bioprinting within a novel support medium with functionalized spheroids, hepatic vein structures and enhanced post-transplantation vascularization. Biomaterials2024; 311: 122681. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2024.122681
2.
ShinJ, . 3D bioprinting of human iPSC-derived kidney organoids using a low-cost, high-throughput customizable 3D bioprinting system. Bioprinting2024; 38: e00337. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00337
3.
YouP, . Composite bioink incorporating cell-laden liver decellularized extracellular matrix for bioprinting of scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomater Adv2024; 165: 214017. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioadv.2024.214017
4.
AjjiZ, JafariA, MousaviA, . 3D bioprinting of thick core–shell vascularized scaffolds for potential tissue engineering applications. Eur Polym J2025; 222: 113564. DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2024.113564
5.
ZanderigoG, BraccoF, SemeraroQ, . In-situ printability maps (IPM): A new approach for in-situ printability assessment with application to extrusion-based bioprinting AM. Bioprinting2023; 36: e00320. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00320
6.
SunJ, GongY, HeY, . Process optimization for coaxial extrusion-based bioprinting: A comprehensive analysis of material behavior, structural precision and cell viability. Addit Manuf2025; 100: 104682. DOI: 10.1016/j.addma.2025.104682
7.
CarvalhoPF, . Nanocomposite hydrogel-based bioinks composed of a fucose-rich polysaccharide and nanocellulose fibers for 3D-bioprinting applications. Bioprinting2025; 45: e00382. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00382
8.
MalekpourA and ChenX.Printability and cell viability in extrusion-based bioprinting from experimental, computational, and machine learning views. J Funct Biomater 2022; 13(12): 1–23. DOI: 10.3390/jfb13020040
9.
LeeS, SonM, LeeJ, . Evaluation of carboxymethylcellulose/alginate 3D bioprinting inks for screw-based microextrusion. Polymers (Basel). 2024;16(8):1–15. DOI: 10.3390/polym 16081137
10.
ChirianniF, VairoG and MarinoM.Development of process design tools for extrusion-based bioprinting: From numerical simulations to nomograms through reduced-order modeling. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2024; 419: 116685. DOI: 10.1016/j.cma.2023.116685
11.
XuB, . A comparative study on cylindrical and spherical models in fabrication of bone tissue engineering scaffolds: Finite element simulation and experiments. Mater Des2021; 211: 110150. DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.110150
12.
BaneshiN, . Investigation of the mechanical properties of a novel multicomponent scaffold coated with a new bio-nanocomposite for bone tissue engineering: Fabrication, simulation and characterization. J Mater Res Technol2021; 15: 5526–5539. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.10.107
13.
JinJ, . Precision pore structure optimization of additive manufacturing porous tantalum scaffolds for bone regeneration: A proof-of-concept study. Biomaterials2025; 313: 122756. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2024.122756
14.
MarchioriG, . Design of a novel procedure for the optimization of the mechanical performances of 3D-printed scaffolds for bone tissue engineering combining CAD, Taguchi method and FEA. Med Eng Phys2019; 69: 92–99. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2019.04.009
15.
AntonovaOY, KochetkovaOY, TailakovM, . Light-responsive ECM-mimetic scaffolds for neural differentiation: Intracellular versus extracellular photothermal stimulation. Smart Mater Med2025; 6(1): 8–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.smaim.2025.02.002
16.
WangF, SemirumiDT, HeA, . Physical, mechanical characterization and artificial neural network modeling of biodegradable composite scaffold for biomedical applications. Eng Appl Artif Intell2024; 136: 108889. DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai. 2024.108889
17.
JinY, . Serum-tolerant polymeric complex for stem-cell transfection and neural differentiation. Nat Commun2025; 16(1): Article 57278-8. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-57278-8
18.
ChenT, . Biodegradable stimulating electrodes for resident neural stem cell activation in vivo. Biomaterials2025; 315: 122957. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2024.122957
19.
LiX, . Conjugated therapy with coaxially printed neural stem cell-laden microfibers and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes on complete transectional spinal cord defects. Mater Today Bio2025; 32: 101639. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.101639
20.
KumarPR, JhaRK, KumarPA, . Improved neurological diagnoses and treatment strategies via automated human brain tissue segmentation from clinical magnetic resonance imaging. Intell Med2024; 4(3): 161–169. DOI: 10.1016/j.imed.2023.10.001
21.
KumarR, TewariA and ParasharA.An atomistic and experimental approach to study the effect of water and nanofillers on the compressive strength of PEGDA hydrogels for cartilage replacement. Mech Mater2024; 199: 105161. DOI: 10.1016/j.mechmat.2024.105161
22.
BernalPN, . Volumetric bioprinting of complex living-tissue constructs within seconds. Adv Mater2019; 31: 1904209. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201904209
23.
DemirD, CeylanS and BölgenN.Chitosan-based injectable cryospheres as a potential biopolymeric carrier for drug delivery systems: Characterization, biocompatibility and drug release. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol2024; 102: 106406. DOI: 10.1016/j.jddst.2024.106406
24.
LiZ, . Rational design of pH-responsive nano-delivery system with improved biocompatibility and targeting ability from cellulose nanocrystals via surface polymerization for intracellular drug delivery. Int J Biol Macromol2024; 281: 136435. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.136435
25.
WangD, . Low-temperature extrusion of waterborne polyurethane–polycaprolactone composites for multi-material bioprinting of engineered elastic cartilage. Macromol Biosci2024; 24(7): 1–11. DOI: 10.1002/mabi.202300557
26.
Mendoza-CerezoL, Rodríguez-RegoJM, Macías-GarcíaA, . Three-dimensional bioprinting of GelMA hydrogels with culture medium: Balancing printability, rheology and cell viability for tissue regeneration. Polymers (Basel)2024; 16(10): e1437. DOI: 10.3390/polym16101437
27.
LiaoS, . A bionic multichannel nanofiber conduit carrying Tubastatin A for repairing injured spinal cord. Mater Today Bio2022; 17: 100454. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100454
28.
SeverM, . The impact of temperature and the duration of freezing on a hydrogel used for a 3D-bioprinted in vitro skin model. Biomedicines2024; 12(9): 2028. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12092028
29.
GuoR and TangW.Optimizing printhead design for enhanced temperature control in extrusion-based bioprinting. Micromachines2024; 15(9): 943. DOI: 10.3390/mi15080943
30.
WellsD, RashadA, GomezA, . Effect of viscosity of gelatin methacryloyl-based bioinks on bone cells. Biofabrication2024; 16: 045036.
31.
PalmaJH, BertuolaM and HermidaÉB.Modeling calcium diffusion and crosslinking dynamics in a thermogelling alginate–gelatin–hyaluronic acid ink: 3D bioprinting applications. Bioprinting2024; 38: e00329. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00329
32.
GuerraA, FortunatoGM, BatoniE, . Multi-material and multi-scale platform for robotic-based in situ bioprinting. Results Eng2025; 104219. DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104219
33.
GuanJ, . Compensating the cell-induced light scattering effect in light-based bioprinting using deep learning. Biofabrication2022; 14(1): 015011. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ac3b92
34.
AdamoA, . Experimental measurements and CFD modelling of hydroxyapatite scaffolds in perfusion bioreactors for bone regeneration. Regen Biomater2023; 10: rbad002. DOI: 10.1093/rb/rbad002
35.
ChengY, . A multilayer biomimetic chitosan–gelatin–fluorohydroxyapatite cartilage scaffold for regenerative medicine application. J Mater Res Technol2021; 14: 1761–1777. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.07.052
36.
SonayeSY, ErtugralEG, KothapalliCR, . Extrusion 3D (bio)printing of alginate-gelatin-based composite scaffolds for skeletal muscle tissue engineering. Materials (Basel)2022;15 (22):7945. DOI: 10.3390/ma15227945
SeitiM, . FRESH 3D bioprinting of alginate–cellulose–gelatin constructs for soft tissue biofabrication. Procedia CIRP2024; 125: 42–47. DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2024.08.008
43.
BlileyJ, TashmanJ, StangM, . FRESH 3D bioprinting a contractile heart tube using human stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Biofabrication2022; 14: 011. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ac58be.
44.
TaoJ, . DLP-based bioprinting of void-forming hydrogels for enhanced stem-cell-mediated bone regeneration. Mater Today Bio2022; 17: 100487. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022. 100487
45.
ZhuS, LiaoX, XuY, . 3D bioprinting of high-performance hydrogel with in situ birth of stem cell spheroids. Bioact Mater2025; 43: 392–405. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.09.033
46.
ShiH, LiY, XuK, . Advantages of photo-curable collagen-based cell-laden bioinks compared to methacrylated gelatin (GelMA) in digital light processing (DLP) and extrusion bioprinting. Mater Today Bio2023; 23: 100799. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100799
47.
ZhongZ, . Rapid 3D bioprinting of a multicellular model recapitulating pterygium microenvironment. Biomaterials2025; 282: 121391. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121391
GehlenJ, QiuW, SchädliGN, . Tomographic volumetric bioprinting of heterocellular bone-like tissues in seconds. Acta Biomater2023; 156: 49–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2022.06.020
50.
StaplesR, IvanovskiS, VaswaniK, . Melt electrowriting scaffolds with fibre-guiding features for periodontal attachment. Acta Biomater2024; 180: 337–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2024.04.006
51.
BinobaidA, De LisiM, CamilleriJ, . Bioprinting zirconia–calcium silicate bioactive composites for dental applications using DLP additive manufacturing. Bioprinting2025; 45: e00377. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00377
52.
KeeffeCO, EichholzK, Von EuwS, . Integrating melt electrowriting and inkjet bioprinting for engineering structurally organized articular cartilage. Biomaterials2022; 283: 121405. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121405
53.
LiuJ, XuH, WangZ, . Numerical modeling of inkjet cell output under the interplay of cell-laden bioink consumption and sedimentation. J Manuf Syst2024; 74: 826–840. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2024.05.009
54.
HaasS, GötzF and HubbuchJ.Bio-based material formulation for extrusion printing by dityrosine crosslinking of unmodified casein. Bioprinting2022; 28: e00245. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2022.e00245
55.
BaniasadiH, . 3D printing and properties of cellulose nanofibril-reinforced quince seed mucilage bio-inks. Int J Biol Macromol2021; 192: 1098–1107. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.10.078
56.
XieF, . Three-dimensional bioprinting of primary human hepatocellular carcinoma for personalized medicine. Biomaterials2021; 265: 120416. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120416
57.
GhorbaniL and RabbaniM.Fabrication of a time–temperature indicator by inkjet printing of a spore-based bio-ink. Bioprinting2021; 21: e00109. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00109
58.
DuffyGL, LiangH, WilliamsRL, . 3D reactive inkjet printing of poly-ɛ-lysine/gellan gum hydrogels for potential corneal constructs. Mater Sci Eng C2021; 131: 112476. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2021.112476
59.
BritoF, IsabelT, HallGN, . Laser-assisted bioprinting of targeted cartilaginous spheroids for high-density bottom-up tissue engineering. Biofabrication2024; 16(4): 1–13.
60.
TortorellaS, . Laser-assisted bioprinting of laminin on biodegradable PLGA substrates: effect on neural stem cell adhesion and differentiation. Bioprinting2022; 26: e00194. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2022.e00194
61.
De SpiritoM, PalmieriV, PeriniG, . Bridging the gap: Integrating 3D bioprinting and microfluidics for advanced multi-organ models in biomedical research. Bioengineering2024; 11(7): 1–10. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11070664
62.
RaviP and ChenVCP.A focused simulation-based optimization of print time and material usage with respect to orientation, layer height and support settings for multi-pathological anatomical models in inverted vat photopolymerization 3D printing. 3D Print Med2021; 7(23): 1–13. DOI: 10.1186/s41205-021-00112-w
63.
SilvaC, Cortés-RodríguezCJ, HazurJ, . Rational design of a triple-layered coaxial extruder system: In silico and in vitro evaluations directed toward optimizing cell viability. Int J Biopr2020; 6(4): 96–105. DOI: 10.18063/ijb.v6i4.282.1
64.
RahatuzzamanM, MahmudM, RahmanS, . Design, fabrication and characterization of 3D-printed ABS and PLA scaffolds potentially for tissue engineering. Results Eng2024; 21: 101685. DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101685
65.
ChirianniF, VairoG and MarinoM.Influence of extruder geometry and bio-ink type in extrusion-based bioprinting via an in silico design tool. Meccanica2024; 59(8): 1285–1299. DOI: 10.1007/s11012-024-01862-7
PoucaMCPV, . Simulating 3D printing on hydrogel inks: a finite element framework for predicting mechanical properties and scaffold deformation. Finite Elem Anal Des2024; 230: 104098. DOI: 10.1016/j.finel.2023.104098
68.
ChoeR, . Computational investigation of interface printing patterns within 3D printed multilayered scaffolds for osteochondral tissue engineering. Biofabrication2022; 14(2): 025008. DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ac5220
69.
FischerEO, . Bioprinting perfusable and vascularized skeletal muscle flaps for the treatment of volumetric muscle loss. Adv Healthc Mater2025; 14: 2404542. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.202404542
70.
WilliamsKA, SainiS and WickTM.Computational fluid dynamics modeling of steady-state momentum and mass transport in a bioreactor for cartilage tissue engineering. Biotechnol Bioeng2002; 77(7): 951–963.
71.
IranmaneshP, GowdiniM and KhademiA.Bioprinting of three-dimensional scaffold based on alginate–gelatin as soft and hard tissue regeneration. J Mater Res Technol2021; 14: 2853–2864. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.08.069
72.
XinY, LiX, YangS, . Calculation of stresses on 3D scaffolds fabricated using extrusion-based bioprinting by a semi-analytical approach. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2022; 135: 105934.
73.
ZhangB.Computational fluid dynamics analysis of the fluid environment of 3D-printed gradient structure in interfacial tissue engineering. Med Eng Phys2024; 128: 104173. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2024.104173
74.
JinZ, HuG, ZhangZ, . Modeling and analysis of post-processing conditions on 4D-bioprinting of deformable hydrogel-based biomaterial inks. Bioprinting2023; 33: e00286. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00286
75.
LiuB, DongB, LiH, . 3D printing finite element analysis of continuous fiber-reinforced composite materials considering printing pressure. Compos Part B Eng2024; 277: 111397. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2024.111397
76.
ImranR, AlA, PolatR, . Numerical study on the effect of process parameters on material extrusion 3D printing (ME3DP) for porous bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Results Eng2024; 22: 102046.
77.
ScocozzaF, . Prediction of the mechanical response of a 3D (bio)printed hybrid scaffold for improving bone tissue regeneration by structural finite element analysis. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2023; 142: 105822. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.105822
78.
JinY, LiuC, ChaiW, . Self-supporting nanoclay as internal scaffold material for direct printing of soft hydrogel composite structures in air. DOI: 10.1021/acsami.7b03613
79.
SongK, ZhangD, YinJ, . Computational study of extrusion bioprinting with jammed gelatin microgel-based composite ink. Addit Manuf2021; 41: 101963. DOI: 10.1016/j.addma.2021. 101963
80.
Sánchez-SánchezR, Rodríguez-RegoJM, Macías-GarcíaA, . Relationship between shear-thinning rheological properties of bioinks and bioprinting parameters. Int J Bioprinting2023; 9(2): 422–431. DOI: 10.18063/ijb.687
81.
SyahromA, Abdul KadirMR, HarunMN, . Permeability study of cancellous bone and its idealised structures. Med Eng Phys2015; 37(1): 77–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.11.001
82.
QuatranoA, FontanaC, RubinoF, . Analysis of the influence of inner morphology on blood flow in 3D-printed bone scaffolds. Procedia CIRP2023; 110: 225–230.
83.
OmarAM, . Geometry-based computational fluid dynamic model for predicting the biological behavior of bone tissue engineering scaffolds. J Funct Biomater2022; 13(3). DOI: 10.3390/jfb13030104
84.
ZhaoF, MelkeJ, ItoK, . A multiscale computational fluid dynamics approach to simulate the micro-fluidic environment within a tissue engineering scaffold with highly irregular pore geometry. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2019; 18(6): 1965–1977. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-019-01188-4
85.
MehboobH, MehboobA, AbbassiF, . Finite element analysis of biodegradable Ti/polyglycolic acid composite bone plates based on 3D printing concept. Compos Struct2022; 289: 115521. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.115521
86.
Gómez-BlancoJC, . Optimising bioprinting nozzles through computational modelling and design of experiments. Biomimetics2024; 9(8). DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics9080460
87.
LemariL, AnandanA, PetiotE, . Rheology, simulation and data analysis toward bioprinting cell viability awareness. Bioprinting2021; 21: e00119.
88.
KaramanD and AslHG.The effects of sheet and network solid structures of similar TPMS scaffold architectures on permeability, wall shear stress and velocity: A CFD analysis. Med Eng Phys2024; 118: 104024. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2023.104024
ZhangH, . Micelle-facilitated gelation kinetics and viscoelasticity of dynamic hyaluronan hydrogels for bioprinting of mimetic constructs and tissue repair. Compos Part B Eng2025; 294: 112151. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2025.112151
91.
NorooziR, ShamekhiMA, MahmoudiR, . In vitro static and dynamic cell culture study of novel bone scaffolds based on 3D-printed PLA and cell-laden alginate hydrogel. Biomed Mater2022; 17: 1–17. DOI: 10.1088/1748-605X/ac7308
92.
NazarrashidiK, RassoliA and SharbatdarM.Physical properties optimization of nerve guidance conduits utilizing genetic algorithm: A CFD analysis. Results Eng2024; 21: 101884. DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2024.101884
93.
WhitelamS, SelinV, BenloloI, . Training neural networks using Metropolis Monte Carlo and an adaptive variant. Mach Learn Sci Technol2022; 3(4): 045012. DOI: 10.1088/2632-2153/aca6cd
94.
RobuA, MironovV and NeaguA.Using sacrificial cell spheroids for the bioprinting of perfusable 3D tissue and organ constructs: A computational study. Comput Math Methods Med2019; 2019: 7853586. DOI: 10.1155/2019/7853586
95.
CaoY, . 3D-printed PCL/GelMA biphasic scaffold boosts cartilage regeneration using co-culture of mesenchymal stem cells and chondrocytes: In vivo study. Mater Des2021; 210: 110065. DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.110065
96.
ChandR, JanarthananG, ElkhouryK, . Digital light processing 3D bioprinting of biomimetic corneal stroma equivalent using gelatin methacryloyl and oxidized carboxymethylcellulose interpenetrating network hydrogel. Biofabrication2025; 17: 018001.
97.
ZhangB.Computational fluid dynamics analysis of the fluid environment of 3D-printed tissue scaffolds within a perfusion bioreactor: The effect of pore shape. Procedia Struct Integr2023; 49: 3–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.prostr.2023.10.002
98.
JiangJ, SunJ, MaH, . Stress intensity factor of a cracked molar restored with different materials and designs: A 3D-FEA. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2023; 142: 105818. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.105818
99.
HwangDG, . Bioprinting-assisted tissue assembly for structural and functional modulation of engineered heart tissue mimicking left ventricular myocardial fiber orientation. Adv Mater2024; 36: 2400364. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202400364
100.
CaoH, . Viscoelastic microenvironment constructed by self-crosslinking hyaluronan hybrid hydrogels regulates chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Compos Part B Eng2023; 263: 110871. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb. 2023.110871
101.
CarlierA, SkvortsovGA, HafeziF, . Computational model-informed design and bioprinting of cell-patterned constructs for bone tissue engineering. Biofabrication2016; 8(1): 015010.
102.
ShopovaD, . (Bio)printing in personalized medicine – opportunities and potential benefits. Bioengineering2023; 10(3): 287. DOI: 10.3390/ bioengineering10030287
103.
GuoQ, . Hybrid construction of tissue-engineered nerve graft using skin-derived precursors induced neurons and Schwann cells to enhance peripheral neuroregeneration. Mater Today Bio2024; 28: 101196. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024. 101196
104.
WangG, LiQ and LiuS.An injectable decellularized extracellular matrix hydrogel with cortical neuron-derived exosomes enhances tissue repair following traumatic spinal cord injury. Mater Today Bio2024; 28: 101250. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101250
105.
PepinR, . Sensory neurons increase keratinocyte proliferation through CGRP release in a tissue-engineered in vitro model of innervation in psoriasis. Acta Biomater2024; 182: 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2024.05.021
106.
AgarwalS, SahaS, BallaVK, . Current developments in 3D bioprinting for tissue and organ regeneration – a review. Front Mech Eng2020; 6: 589171. DOI: 10.3389/fmech.2020. 589171
107.
MarescaJA, DemelDC, WagnerGA, . Three-dimensional bioprinting applications for bone tissue engineering. Cells2023; 12(9): 1–16. DOI: 10.3390/cells12091230.
108.
TahmasebifarA, TürkerE and YilmazB.Bioprinting of bioglass–alginate/carboxymethyl cellulose for bone tissue engineering. Bioprinting2023; 34: e00296. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00296
109.
JiYB, . Scaffold printing using biodegradable poly(1,4-butylene carbonate) ink: Printability, in vivo physicochemical properties and biocompatibility. Mater Today Bio2021; 12: 100129. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2021.100129
110.
HuoH, WenP, CaoL, . Design and preparation of biomimetic “hard–soft” functional scaffold with gradient irregular pore structure for bone repair. J Mater Res Technol2024; 33: 6363–6373. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2024.11.013
111.
ZhangX, . Augmenting osteoporotic bone regeneration through a hydrogel-based rejuvenating microenvironment. Bioact Mater2024; 41: 440–454. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat. 2024.07.036
112.
WangL, . In situ sustained-release hydrogel system delivering GLUT1 inhibitor and chemo-drug for cancer post-surgical treatment. Bioact Mater2024; 36: 541–550. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.06.034
113.
VijayavenkataramanS, YanWC, LuWF, . 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs for regenerative medicine. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2018; 132: 296–332. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2018.07.004
114.
AbasalizadehF, . Alginate-based hydrogels as drug delivery vehicles in cancer treatment and their applications in wound dressing and 3D bioprinting. J Biol Eng2020; 7: 1–22.
115.
GuanG, LvQ, LiuS, . 3D-bioprinted peptide coupling patches for wound healing. Mater Today Bio2022; 13: 100188. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2021.100188
116.
DaoudA, XiaS, LaselvaO, . Testing organ-specific responses to therapies in tissues differentiated from cystic fibrosis patient-derived iPSCs. Stem Cell Res2025; 83: 103653. DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2025.103653
117.
ShinJ, . 3D bioprinting of human iPSC-derived kidney organoids using a low-cost, high-throughput customizable 3D bioprinting system. Bioprinting2024; 38: e00337. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00337
118.
YangJ, . 3D bio-printed living nerve-like fibers refine the ecological niche for long-distance spinal cord injury regeneration. Bioact Mater2023; 25: 160–175. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.01.023
119.
SkottmanH, PuistolaP, HuhtanenS, . Multi-material 3D bioprinting of human stem cells to engineer complex human corneal structures with stroma and epithelium. Bioprinting2025; 46: e00391. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2025.e00391
120.
PariharA, . 3D printing: advancement in biogenerative engineering to combat shortage of organs and bioapplicable materials. Regen Eng Transl Med2022; 8(2): 173–199. DOI: 10.1007/s40883-021-00219-w
121.
PourchetL, . Large 3D bioprinted tissue: Heterogeneous perfusion and vascularization. Bioprinting2018; 13: e00039. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2018.e00039
122.
AtesG and BartoloP.Numerical simulation of multimaterial polymer mixing for bioprinting applications. J Addit Manuf Technol2021; 1(3): 1–14. DOI: 10.18416/JAMTECH.2111606
123.
HwangboH, ChaeS, RyuD, . In situ magnetic-field-assisted bioprinting process using magnetorheological bioink to obtain engineered muscle constructs. Bioact Mater2025; 45: 417–433. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.11.035
124.
Gómez-BlancoJC, Mancha-SánchezE, MarcosAC, . Bioink temperature influence on shear stress, pressure and velocity using computational simulation. Processes2020; 8(7): 865. DOI: 10.3390/PR8070865
125.
RameshS, DeepA, TamayolA, . Advancing 3D bioprinting through machine learning and artificial intelligence. Bioprinting2024; 38: e00331. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00331
126.
SarahR, SchimmelpfennigK, RohauerR, . Characterization and machine learning-driven property prediction of a novel hybrid hydrogel bioink considering extrusion-based 3D bioprinting. Gels2025; 11(1): 45. DOI: 10.3390/gels11010045
127.
OhD, KimD and NamSY.Predicting printability in suspended bioprinting using a rheology-informed hierarchical machine learning approach. Bioprinting2025; 50: e00427. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2025.e00427
