AccScience Publishing / IJB / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/IJB026280296
Submit to IJB
Cite this article
32
Download
472
Views
Related Info Links
Google Scholar
More by Authors Links
Lin Zhu
Yujie Wang
Pengbei Fan
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
REVIEW ARTICLE

Multiscale 3D printing for hierarchical reconstruction and functional regeneration of bone tissue

Yueyang Wang1† ,  Yazhe Fan1† ,  Yue Wang2 ,  Maisha Feng2 ,  Li Ji3 ,  Jinfan Wei1 ,  Linyi Wang1 ,  Lin Zhu4* ,  Yujie Wang2* ,  Pengbei Fan5,6*
Show Less
1 School of Bone and Joint Medicine, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
2 School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
3 The Third Clinical Medical College of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
4 Department of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
5 School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
6 Wangqi Academy of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, National Institute of TCM Constitution and Preventive Treatment of Disease, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
†These authors contributed equally to this work.
IJB, 026280296 https://doi.org/10.36922/IJB026280296
Received: 8 July 2026 | Revised: 29 July 2026 | Accepted: 5 August 2026 | Published online: 6 August 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Download PDF
XML
Cite
Abstract

Bone tissue engineering (BTE) has emerged as a promising approach for repairing critical bone defects that remain challenging to treat using conventional grafting strategies. Recent advances in three-dimensional (3D) printing have enabled the fabrication of patient-specific and biomimetic bone constructs with precise control over structural architecture, material composition, and biological functionality. However, native bone exhibits a highly hierarchical organization spanning multiple length scales, and current 3D printing approaches often remain limited by insufficient integration between macroscopic mechanical reconstruction, microscale cellular regulation, and nanoscale bioactive signaling. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of multiscale 3D printing strategies for bone tissue reconstruction, highlighting how additive manufacturing technologies facilitate the recapitulation of hierarchical bone structures. We first summarize the historical evolution of 3D printing in BTE and discuss advances in bioinks, biomaterials, and printing technologies. Subsequently, we analyze multiscale reconstruction strategies from three perspectives: macroscale fabrication for personalized anatomical restoration and mechanical support, microscale construction for cellular organization and vascular network formation, and nanoscale engineering for biomimetic extracellular matrix interfaces and molecular regulation. Furthermore, we discuss emerging strategies integrating smart responsive materials, bioactive cues, and computational design to enhance the regenerative capacity of 3D-printed bone constructs. Finally, current challenges and future perspectives are presented, focusing on vascularization, immune regulation, artificial intelligence-assisted scaffold optimization, four-dimensional bioprinting, and clinical translation. This review highlights the potential of multiscale 3D printing as a transformative platform for developing functional bone tissues and advancing personalized regenerative medicine.

Keywords
Multiscale 3D bioprinting
Bone tissue engineering
Biofabrication
Tissue reconstitution
Regenerative medicine
Funding
This work was supported by the Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students in Henan Province (Grant No. S202510471035) and the Scientific Research Seedling Engineering of Henan University of Chinese Medicine (Grant Nos. 2025MPXS18 and 2025MPXS25).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Wang Y-x, Deng Z-h, Li Y-y, et al. Function of hematopoiesis and bone marrow niche in inflammation and non-hematopoietic diseases. Life Medicine. 2025;4(3):lnaf015. doi: 10.1093/lifemedi/lnaf015
  2. Wu A-M, Bisignano C, James SL, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of bone fractures in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet Healthy Longevity. 2021;2(9):e580-e592. doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00172-0
  3. Yue X, Sun X, Li Z, et al. Biomimetic Piezoelectric Periosteum‐Bone Integrated Implant Promotes Bone Defect Repair by Remodeling Osteogenic Microenvironment. Adv Funct Mater. 2025;35(35):2423492. doi: 10.1002/adfm.202423492
  4. Gläser N, Schröder M, Barcik J, Haffner-Luntzer M, Wehrle E. Extended view on the mechanobiology of fracture healing: interplay between mechanics and inflammation. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2025;13:1652897. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1652897
  5. Steppe L, Megafu M, Tschaffon-Müller MEA, Ignatius A, Haffner-Luntzer M. Fracture healing research: Recent insights. Bone Rep. 2023;19:101686. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2023.101686
  6. Moghaddam A, Bahrami M, Mirzadeh M, et al. Recent trends in bone tissue engineering: a review of materials, methods, and structures. Biomed Mater. 2024;19(4):042007. doi: 10.1088/1748-605X/ad407d
  7. Laubach M, Whyte S, Chan HF, et al. Lost in translation: the lack of agreement between surgeons and scientists regarding biomaterials research and innovation for treating bone defects. BMC Medicine. 2024;22(1):517. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03734-z
  8. Fernandez de Grado G, Keller L, Idoux-Gillet Y, et al. Bone substitutes: a review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management. J Tissue Eng. 2018;9:2041731418776819. doi: 10.1177/2041731418776819
  9. Santoro A, Voto A, Fortino L, et al. Bone defect treatment in regenerative medicine: exploring natural and synthetic bone substitutes. Int J Mol Sci. 2025;26(7):3085. doi: 10.3390/ijms26073085
  10. Ivanova N, Ivanov S, Peev S, Dikova T. Types of bone substitutes and their application in regenerative medicine: A systematic review. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16(9):341. doi: 10.3390/jfb16090341
  11. Huang L, Guo Z, Yang X, et al. Advancements in GelMA bioactive hydrogels: Strategies for infection control and bone tissue regeneration. Theranostics. 2025;15(2):460-493. doi: 10.7150/thno.103725
  12. Ngo TD, Kashani A, Imbalzano G, Nguyen KTQ, Hui D. Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Composites, Part B. 2018;143:172-196. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012
  13. Bose S, Vahabzadeh S, Bandyopadhyay A. Bone tissue engineering using 3D printing. Mater Today. 2013;16(12):496-504. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2013.11.017
  14. Sun J, Chen C, Zhang B, Yao C, Zhang Y. Advances in 3D-printed scaffold technologies for bone defect repair: materials, biomechanics, and clinical prospects. Biomed Eng Online. 2025;24(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s12938-025-01381-w
  15. Zhou J, See CW, Sreenivasamurthy S, Zhu D. Customized additive manufacturing in bone scaffolds—the gateway to precise bone defect treatment. Research. 2023;6:0239. doi: 10.34133/research.0239
  16. Luo Q, Shang K, Zhu J, et al. Biomimetic cell culture for cell adhesive propagation for tissue engineering strategies. Mater Horiz. 2023;10(11):4662-4685. doi: 10.1039/d3mh00849e
  17. Singaravelu S, Abrahamse H, Kumar SSD. Three-dimensional bio-derived materials for biomedical applications: challenges and opportunities. RSC Adv. 2025;15(12):9375-9397. doi: 10.1039/d4ra07531e
  18. Hull CW. Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. United States patent 4,575,330. March 11, 1986.
  19. Deckard CR, Beaman JJ. Solid freeform fabrication and selective powder sintering. In: Proceedings of the 15th North American Manufacturing Research Conference; 1987:636-640.
  20. Crump S. The extrusion process of fused deposition modeling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Rapid Prototyping. June 7–10, 1992; Dayton, OH. pp. 91–102.
  21. Lin S, German R. Interaction between binder and powder in injection moulding of alumina. J Mater Sci. 1994;29(19):5207-5212. doi: 10.1007/BF01151118
  22. Hutmacher DW, Schantz T, Zein I, Ng KW, Teoh SH, Tan KC. Mechanical properties and cell cultural response of polycaprolactone scaffolds designed and fabricated via fused deposition modeling. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;55(2):203-216. doi: 10.1002/1097-4636(200105)55:2<203::aid-jbm1007>3.0.co;2-7
  23. Anada T, Pan C-C, Stahl AM, et al. Vascularized bone-mimetic hydrogel constructs by 3D bioprinting to promote osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(5):1096. doi: 10.3390/ijms20051096
  24. Chiesa I, De Maria C, Lapomarda A, et al. Endothelial cells support osteogenesis in an in vitro vascularized bone model developed by 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication. 2020;12(2):025013. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab6a1d
  25. Shen M, Wang L, Gao Y, et al. 3D bioprinting of in situ vascularized tissue engineered bone for repairing large segmental bone defects. Mater Today Bio. 2022;16:100382. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100382
  26. Gong M, Zha Y, Lu S, et al. Efficacy and safety of the low-temperature-derived 3D printed biodegradable Mg-containing composite porous scaffold for bone defect repair: A prospective and multi-center randomized controlled trial. Biomaterials. 2026;327:123751. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2025.123751
  27. Kumar P, Sharma J, Kumar R, et al. Advances in bioink-based 3D printed scaffolds: optimizing biocompatibility and mechanical properties for bone regeneration. Biomater Sci. 2025;13(10):2556-2579. doi: 10.1039/D4BM01606H
  28. Zou R, Han X, Meng Y, et al. Improved mechanical performance and forming accuracy of ZrO2 fixed partial denture based on the digital light processing technology. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2025;163:106840. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106840
  29. Sarraf M, Rezvani Ghomi E, Alipour S, Ramakrishna S, Liana Sukiman N. A state-of-the-art review of the fabrication and characteristics of titanium and its alloys for biomedical applications. Bio-Des Manuf. 2022;5(2):371-395. doi: 10.1007/s42242-021-00170-3
  30. Sivasankar MV, Chinta ML, Sreenivasa Rao P. Zirconia based composite scaffolds and their application in bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024;265:130558. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130558
  31. Maté-Sánchez de Val JE, Mazón P, Calvo-Guirado JL, et al. Comparison of three hydroxyapatite/β-tricalcium phosphate/collagen ceramic scaffolds: An in vivo study. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2014;102(4):1037-1046. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.34785
  32. Jensen SS, Yeo A, Dard M, Hunziker E, Schenk R, Buser D. Evaluation of a novel biphasic calcium phosphate in standardized bone defects. A histologic and histomorphometric study in the mandibles of minipigs. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2007;18(6):752-760. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01417.x
  33. Jeong J, Kim JH, Shim JH, Hwang NS, Heo CY. Bioactive calcium phosphate materials and applications in bone regeneration. Biomater Res. 2019;23:4. doi: 10.1186/s40824-018-0149-3
  34. Cui J, Xia L, Lin K, Wang X. In situ construction of a nano-structured akermanite coating for promoting bone formation and osseointegration of Ti–6Al–4V implants in a rabbit osteoporosis model. J Mater Chem B. 2021;9(46):9505-9513. doi: 10.1039/d1tb01917a
  35. Liu K, Wang J, Fang S, et al. Effect of polycaprolactone impregnation on the properties of calcium silicate scaffolds fabricated by 3D printing. Mater Des. 2022;220:110856. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110856
  36. Wu C, Chang J, Zhai W, Ni S, Wang J. Porous akermanite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Preparation, characterization, and in vitro studies. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B: Applied Biomaterials. 2006;78(1):47-55. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.30456
  37. Niinomi M, Liu Y, Nakai M, Liu H, Li H. Biomedical titanium alloys with Young's moduli close to that of cortical bone. Regener Biomater. 2016;3(3):173-185. doi: 10.1093/rb/rbw016
  38. Yao B, Liu Z, Li H, et al. Research on SLM formation and fatigue properties of Ti6Al4V femoral porous structures based on topology optimization. Mater Chem Phys. 2025;347:131484. doi: 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2025.131484
  39. Ceddia M, Romasco T, Pietro ND, et al. Quantifying Stress Shielding in Dental Implants: A Comparative Finite Element Study of Titanium, CFR-PEEK, and Ceramic Materials. Materials. 2026;19(5):869. doi: 10.3390/ma19050869
  40. Wang L, Wang X, Wu J, et al. Magnesium Ions Induce Endothelial Cell Differentiation into Tip Cell and Enhance Vascularized Bone Regeneration. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2025;14(19):e2500274. doi: 10.1002/adhm.202500274
  41. Drotárová L, Slámečka K, Balint T, et al. Biodegradable WE43 Mg alloy/hydroxyapatite interpenetrating phase composites with reduced hydrogen evolution. Bioact Mater. 2024;42:519-530. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.08.048
  42. Li D, Zhang D, Yuan Q, et al. In vitro and in vivo assessment of the effect of biodegradable magnesium alloys on osteogenesis. Acta Biomater. 2022;141:454-465. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2021.12.032
  43. Ma H, Wu L, Liu C, et al. First-principles modeling of the hydrogen evolution reaction and its application in electrochemical corrosion of Mg. Acta Mater. 2020;183:377-389. doi: 10.1016/j.actamat.2019.11.025
  44. Li P, Dai J, Li Y, et al. Zinc based biodegradable metals for bone repair and regeneration: Bioactivity and molecular mechanisms. Mater Today Bio. 2024;25:100932. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100932
  45. Yang X, Peng Z, Fang Y, Tang Y, Shen H-H, Zhu Y. Review of additively manufactured zinc alloys by laser powder bed fusion for biomedical applications. Rare Met. 2025;44(11):8262-8291. doi: 10.1007/s12598-025-03518-1
  46. Wang X, Liu A, Zhang Z, et al. Additively Manufactured Zn‐2Mg Alloy Porous Scaffolds with Customizable Biodegradable Performance and Enhanced Osteogenic Ability. Adv Sci. 2024;11(5):2307329. doi: 10.1002/advs.202307329
  47. Dong Z, Han C, Liu G, et al. Revealing anisotropic mechanisms in mechanical and degradation properties of zinc fabricated by laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Science & Technology. 2025;214:87-104. doi: 10.1016/j.jmst.2024.06.045
  48. Jiao J, Hong Q, Zhang D, et al. Influence of porosity on osteogenesis, bone growth and osteointegration in trabecular tantalum scaffolds fabricated by additive manufacturing. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023;11:1117954. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1117954
  49. Wang X, Liu W, Jiang C, et al. Research progress on the osteogenic properties of tantalum in the field of medical implant materials. J Mater Res Technol. 2024;30:1706-1715. doi: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2024.03.200
  50. Bobyn JD, Stackpool GJ, Hacking SA, Tanzer M, Krygier JJ. Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British volume. 1999;81-B(5):907-914. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.81b5.0810907
  51. Choi Y, Kim C, Kim HS, Moon C, Lee KY. 3D Printing of dynamic tissue scaffold by combining self-healing hydrogel and self-healing ferrogel. Colloids Surf, B. 2021;208:112108. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.112108
  52. Amini-Mosleh-Abadi S, Yazdanpanah Z, Ketabat F, et al. In vitro characterization of 3D printed polycaprolactone/graphene oxide scaffolds impregnated with alginate and gelatin hydrogels for bone tissue engineering. J Biomater Appl. 2025;40(3):374-388. doi: 10.1177/08853282251336552
  53. Guo L, Liang Z, Yang L, et al. The role of natural polymers in bone tissue engineering. J Controlled Release. 2021;338:571-582. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.08.055
  54. Yang XB, Roach HI, Clarke NMP, et al. Human osteoprogenitor growth and differentiation on synthetic biodegradable structures after surface modification. Bone. 2001;29(6):523-531. doi: 10.1016/s8756-3282(01)00617-2
  55. Takagi A, Hsu Y-I, Uyama H. Biodegradable poly (lactic acid) and polycaprolactone alternating multiblock copolymers with controllable mechanical properties. Polym Degrad Stab. 2023;218:110564. doi: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2023.110564
  56. Zhu S, Sun H, Mu T, Richel A. Research Progress in 3D Printed Biobased and Biodegradable Polyester/Ceramic Composite Materials: Applications and Challenges in Bone Tissue Engineering. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2025;17(2):2791-2813. doi: 10.1021/acsami.4c15719
  57. Shirali D, Emadi R, Khodaei M, Emadi H, Arab Eshagh Abadi M, Tayebi L. Surface modification of 3D-printed polylactic acid-hardystonite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025;308:142496. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.142496
  58. Mathur V, Agarwal P, Kasturi M, Srinivasan V, Seetharam RN, Vasanthan KS. Innovative bioinks for 3D bioprinting: Exploring technological potential and regulatory challenges. J Tissue Eng. 2025;16:20417314241308022. doi: 10.1177/20417314241308022
  59. Singh AK, Pramanik K, Biswas A. Constructing a biofunctionalized 3D-printed gelatin/sodium alginate/chitosan tri-polymer complex scaffold with improvised biological and mechanical properties for bone-tissue engineering. Bio-Des Manuf. 2024;7(1):57-73. doi: 10.1007/s42242-023-00249-z
  60. Aminmansour S, Cardoso LM, Anselmi C, de Carvalho ABG, Rahimnejad M, Bottino MC. Development of Cerium Oxide-Laden GelMA/PCL Scaffolds for Periodontal Tissue Engineering. Materials. 2024;17(16):3904. doi: 10.3390/ma17163904
  61. Li D, Chen P, Du H, Li Z, Li M, Xu Y. 3D-Printed Shape Memory and Piezoelectric Bifunctional Thermoplastic Polyurethane/Polyvinylidene Fluoride Porous Composite Scaffold for Bone Regeneration. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering. 2024;10(11):7100-7110. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.4c01221
  62. Li Z, Li G, Wang X, Zhao Z. Piezoelectric composite hydrogel with wireless electrical stimulation enhances motor functional recovery of spinal cord injury. Journal of Materials Science & Technology. 2024;172:228-239. doi: 10.1016/j.jmst.2023.07.014
  63. Liu J, Han Y, Hu C, Wang Y, He C. The Evolution and Frontiers of Piezoelectric Materials for Bone and Cartilage Regeneration Research. Tissue Engineering Part C: Methods. 2025;31(12):396-414. doi: 10.1177/19373384251405475
  64. Zheng H, Yan P, Liu P, et al. Ultrasound-activated piezoelectric scaffolds target dual Ca2+/NF-κB signaling pathways to orchestrate immunomodulation and osteogenesis for accelerated bone regeneration. Mater Today Bio. 2025;35:102299. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.102299
  65. Huang H, Wang K, Liu X, et al. Piezoelectric biomaterials for providing electrical stimulation in bone tissue engineering: Barium titanate. Journal of Orthopaedic Translation. 2025;51:94-107. doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2024.12.011
  66. Zhang C, Cai D, Liao P, et al. 4D Printing of shape-memory polymeric scaffolds for adaptive biomedical implantation. Acta Biomater. 2021;122:101-110. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.12.042
  67. Mahjoubnia A, Cai D, Wu Y, et al. Digital light 4D printing of bioresorbable shape memory elastomers for personalized biomedical implantation. Acta Biomater. 2024;177:165-177. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2024.02.009
  68. Hu X, He J, Yong X, et al. Biodegradable poly (lactic acid-co-trimethylene carbonate)/chitosan microsphere scaffold with shape-memory effect for bone tissue engineering. Colloids Surf, B. 2020;195:111218. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2020.111218
  69. Li B, Ma Y, Fatima K, et al. 3D printed shape-memory piezoelectric scaffolds with in-situ self-power properties for bone defect repair. J Nanobiotechnol. 2025;23(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s12951-025-03325-x
  70. Liu C, Xie Y, Zhang Y, et al. MOF‐Based Guided Bone Regeneration Membrane for Promoting Osteogenesis by Regulating Bone Microenvironment through Cascade Effects. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2024;14(26):e2403187. doi: 10.1002/adhm.202403187
  71. Liu X, Schreiber AC, Astudillo Potes MD, et al. Bone Enzyme-Responsive Biodegradable Poly(propylene fumarate) and Polycaprolactone Polyphosphoester Dendrimer Cross-Linked via Click Chemistry for Bone Tissue Engineering. Biomacromolecules. 2025;26(2):835-847. doi: 10.1021/acs.biomac.4c00999
  72. Fu X, Luo Z, Guo Y, et al. Microenvironment-responsive multifunctional enzyme-linked hydrogel for diabetic bone defect regeneration. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):10275. doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-65165-5
  73. Liu H, Ai R, Liu B, He L. Dual ROS/Glucose-Responsive Quercetin-Loaded Supramolecular Hydrogel for Diabetic Wound Healing. Biomacromolecules. 2025;26(3):1541-1554. doi: 10.1021/acs.biomac.4c01331
  74. Wei H, Cui J, Lin K, Xie J, Wang X. Recent advances in smart stimuli-responsive biomaterials for bone therapeutics and regeneration. Bone Res. 2022;10(1):17. doi: 10.1038/s41413-021-00180-y
  75. Chen F, Zhu H, Wu J-M, et al. Preparation and biological evaluation of ZrO2 all-ceramic teeth by DLP technology. Ceram Int. 2020;46(8):11268-11274. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.01.152
  76. Zhao X, Liu J, Li L. Research Progress and Challenges in 3D Printing of Bioceramics and Bioceramic Matrix Composites. Biomimetics. 2025;10(7):428. doi: 10.3390/biomimetics10070428
  77. Zhang H, Jiao C, He Z, et al. Fabrication and properties of 3D printed zirconia scaffold coated with calcium silicate/hydroxyapatite. Ceram Int. 2021;47(19):27032-27041. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.06.116
  78. Ma H, Feng C, Chang J, Wu C. 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds: From bone tissue engineering to tumor therapy. Acta Biomater. 2018;79:37-59. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.08.026
  79. Xu C, Wu F, Yang J, et al. 3D printed long-term structurally stable bioceramic dome scaffolds with controllable biodegradation favorable for guided bone regeneration. Chem Eng J. 2022;450:138003. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.138003
  80. Liu R, Ma L, Liu H, Xu B, Feng C, He R. Effects of pore size on the mechanical and biological properties of stereolithographic 3D printed HAp bioceramic scaffold. Ceram Int. 2021;47(20):28924-28931. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.07.053
  81. Sarode B, Kuthe A, Bhishnurkar AD, Bagde AD. Influence of heating rate and soak time on microwave sintered hydroxyapatite and β-tricalcium phosphate ceramics for bone applications. Sci Rep. 2026;16(1):1182. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-30915-4
  82. Kim H-W, Lee H-H, Chun G-S. Bioactivity and osteoblast responses of novel biomedical nanocomposites of bioactive glass nanofiber filled poly(lactic acid). J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2008;85A(3):651-663. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.31339
  83. Thangavel M, Elsen SR. Evaluation and optimization of physical, mechanical, and biological characteristics of 3D printed Whitlockite/calcium silicate composite scaffold for bone tissue regeneration using response surface methodology. Biomed Mater. 2025;20(2):025017. doi: 10.1088/1748-605X/adad27
  84. Zhu W, Zhao T, Wang H, et al. Injectable and Assembled Calcium Sulfate/Magnesium Silicate 3D Scaffold Promotes Bone Repair by In Situ Osteoinduction. Bioengineering. 2025;12(6):599. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12060599
  85. Shearer A, Montazerian M, Mauro JC. Modern definition of bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. J Non-Cryst Solids. 2023;608:122228. doi: 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2023.122228
  86. Shendage SS, Kamble G, Chavan R, et al. Bioactive Glass for Bone Tissue Regeneration: Focusing on the Key Biological Properties. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering. 2026;12(1):71-89. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.5c01283
  87. Li S, Mohammed AA, Nommeots-Nomm A, et al. Human bone marrow derived stem cell differentiation on 3D printed bioactive glass scaffolds. J Mater Sci: Mater Med. 2025;36(1):69. doi: 10.1007/s10856-025-06918-y
  88. Lee CY, Kung PC, Huang CC, et al. In Vivo Study of Bone Growth Around Additively Manufactured Implants With Ti‐6Al‐4V and Bioactive Glass Powder Composites. J Orthop Res. 2025;43(10):1796-1804. doi: 10.1002/jor.70037
  89. Zhang X, Zu H, Zhao D, et al. Ion channel functional protein kinase TRPM7 regulates Mg ions to promote the osteoinduction of human osteoblast via PI3K pathway: In vitro simulation of the bone-repairing effect of Mg-based alloy implant. Acta Biomater. 2017;63:369-382. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.08.051
  90. Sheng X, Li C, Wang Z, et al. Advanced applications of strontium-containing biomaterials in bone tissue engineering. Mater Today Bio. 2023;20:100636. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100636
  91. Shan Y, Bai Y, Zhao L, et al. Three-dimensional-printed strontium-incorporated β-TCP bioceramic triply periodic minimal surface scaffolds with enhanced angiogenic and osteogenic properties. Regener Biomater. 2025;12:rbaf080. doi: 10.1093/rb/rbaf080
  92. Deng F, Bu Z, Hu H, Huang X, Liu Z, Ning C. Bioadaptable bone regeneration of Zn-containing silicocarnotite bioceramics with moderate biodegradation and antibacterial activity. Appl Mater Today. 2022;27:101433. doi: 10.1016/j.apmt.2022.101433
  93. Fan Y, Yao J, Liu W, et al. 3D printed composite scaffold accelerates bone regeneration by modulating immunity and promoting angiogenesis. Journal of Materials Science & Technology. 2026;240:1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jmst.2025.03.041
  94. Ho C-C, Hsu T-T, Chiu Y-C, Lin Y-H, Xie P-C, Wang C-Y. 3D-printed magnesium/strontium-co-doped calcium silicate scaffolds promote angiogenesis and bone regeneration through synergistic bioactive ion stimulation. J Biol Eng. 2025;19(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s13036-025-00528-6
  95. Chen L, Zhou C, Xie Q, et al. Zinc Doped Synthetic Polymer Composites for Bone Regeneration: A Promising Strategy to Repair Bone Defects. Int J Nanomed. 2025;20:8567-8586. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S512994
  96. Sharma D, Nouri A, Sharma V. Strategic Control of Porosity and Post‐Processing in Additive Manufacturing of Metallic Bone Scaffolds. Adv Eng Mater. 2025;27(17):2500749. doi: 10.1002/adem.202500749
  97. Wang X, Liu W, Yu X, et al. Advances in surface modification of tantalum and porous tantalum for rapid osseointegration: A thematic review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022;10:983695. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.983695
  98. Gokyer S, Monsef YA, Buyuksungur S, et al. MgCa-Based Alloys Modified with Zn- and Ga-Doped CaP Coatings Lead to Controlled Degradation and Enhanced Bone Formation in a Sheep Cranium Defect Model. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering. 2024;10(7):4452-4462. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.4c00358
  99. Goto M, Matsumine A, Yamaguchi S, et al. Osteoconductivity of bioactive Ti-6Al-4V implants with lattice-shaped interconnected large pores fabricated by electron beam melting. J Biomater Appl. 2021;35(9):1153-1167. doi: 10.1177/0885328220968218
  100. Li D, Xie H, Gao C, Jiang H, Wang L, Shuai C. Harmonic heterostructured pure Ti fabricated by laser powder bed fusion for excellent wear resistance via strength-plasticity synergy. Opto-Electronic Advances. 2025;8(9):250043. doi: 10.29026/oea.2025.250043
  101. Abd-Elaziem W, Darwish MA, Hamada A, Daoush WM. Titanium-Based alloys and composites for orthopedic implants Applications: A comprehensive review. Mater Des. 2024;241:112850. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2024.112850
  102. Dhinasekaran D, Sivakumar JP, Rajendran AR. Enhancement of implant performance through synergistic drug delivery and bioactivity by nanotubular titanium with hydroxyapatite coating. Int J Pharm. 2025;681:125854. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2025.125854
  103. Xu D, Wang X, Li M, et al. Enhancing titanium-osteointegration: antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory and osteogenic properties of multifunctional coatings through layer-by-layer self-assembly. Appl Surf Sci. 2025;686:162149. doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2024.162149
  104. Nezhad AN, Zahrani EM, Mousavinasab S, Alfantazi A. A comprehensive review of additively manufactured biomedical titanium alloys for bone tissue engineering: Biocorrosion, biomechanical, and biological properties. J Mater Res Technol. 2025;36:9113-9157. doi: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2025.05.069
  105. Hashmi AW, Tian Y, Wang C, et al. Adapted interfaces in magnesium alloys for biomedical applications: Synthesis, properties, and performance enhancement. J Alloys Compd. 2025;1048:185179. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2025.185179
  106. Aikin M, Shalomeev V, Kukhar V, et al. Recent advances in biodegradable magnesium alloys for medical implants: evolution, innovations, and clinical translation. Crystals. 2025;15(8):671. doi: 10.3390/cryst15080671
  107. Raj V, Sabarinath S, Vignesh RV, Padil VV. Structure–Property–Biocompatibility Interplay in Heat-Treated WE43 Magnesium Alloy. Mater Chem Phys. 2025;348(2):131623. doi: 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2025.131623
  108. Dong L, Zhang G, Shen Z, et al. Degradation of WE43 Magnesium Alloy in Vivo and Its Degradation Products on Macrophages. ACS Omega. 2025;10(17):17280-17295. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.4c09349
  109. Yang H, Huang H, Li S, et al. Biodegradable zinc-based metallic materials: Mechanisms, properties, and applications. Prog Mater Sci. 2026;157:101584. doi: 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2025.101584
  110. Liang S, Du S, Zheng Y, Xia D, Zhou Y. Biodegradable Zn-xY alloys with enhanced osteogenesis and angiogenesis effects for bone implant applications. Acta Biomater. 2025;201:684-702. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2025.05.048
  111. Wang X, Xu S, Zhou S, et al. Topological design and additive manufacturing of porous metals for bone scaffolds and orthopaedic implants: A review. Biomaterials. 2016;83:127-141. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.01.012
  112. Liu A, Wang C, Zhao Z, et al. Progress of porous tantalum surface-modified biomaterial coatings in bone tissue engineering. J Mater Sci: Mater Med. 2025;36(1):26. doi: 10.1007/s10856-025-06871-w
  113. Wauthle R, Van der Stok J, Yavari SA, et al. Additively manufactured porous tantalum implants. Acta Biomater. 2015;14:217-225. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.12.003
  114. Ilo KC, Van Duren BH, Berber R, Matar HE, Manktelow AR, Bloch BV. Comparing trabecular metal versus fiber mesh cementless acetabular components: a single-center study of 6,563 hips. The Journal of Arthroplasty. 2025;40(6):1589-1593. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.11.048
  115. Tang H, Yang K, Jia L, He W, Yang L, Zhang X. Tantalum Bone Implants Printed by Selective Electron Beam Manufacturing (SEBM) and Their Clinical Applications. JOM. 2020;72(3):1016-1021. doi: 10.1007/s11837-020-04016-8
  116. Srinivasan S, Vijayalekha A, Pandurangan AK. Eugenol-loaded sodium Alginate/Chitosan/β-TCP composite scaffold for bone defect regeneration: an in-silico and in-vitro evaluation. Biotechnology for Sustainable Materials. 2025;2(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s44316-025-00048-9
  117. Zhu Y, Yu X, Liu H, et al. Strategies of functionalized GelMA-based bioinks for bone regeneration: recent advances and future perspectives. Bioact Mater. 2024;38:346-373. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.04.032
  118. Gharibshahian M, Salehi M, Beheshtizadeh N, et al. Recent advances on 3D-printed PCL-based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023;11:1168504. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1168504
  119. Chen Y, Zhang G, Ge D, Wang M, Wu T, Zou Z. Physicochemical properties and biocompatibility of 3D printed PVDF-TrFE-CPS composite bone scaffolds with piezoelectric properties. Mater Des. 2025;260:115004. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2025.115004
  120. Meng D, Hou Y, Zubairi H, et al. Ceramic-based piezoelectric material reinforced 3D printed polycaprolactone bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Mater Des. 2025;257:114542. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2025.114542
  121. Dixon DT, Landree EN, Gomillion CT. Biomimetic Dual-Sensing Bone Scaffolds: Characterization and In Vitro Evaluation Under Dynamic Culturing Conditions. Biomimetics. 2025;10(9):598. doi: 10.3390/biomimetics10090598
  122. Wang Y, Zhang H, Xu Z, et al. Icariin-loaded GelMa hydrogel encapsulated potassium sodium niobate biomimetic piezoelectric scaffold regulates macrophage polarization to accelerate bone defect repair. Mater Today Bio. 2025;35:102476. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.102476
  123. Yang S, Hu Q, Hu Y, et al. Sequential treatment of infectious bone defects with 3D-printed body temperature-responsive shape memory scaffold coated with metal-polyphenol layers. Burns & Trauma. 2026;14:tkaf072. doi: 10.1093/burnst/tkaf072
  124. Lv S, Zhang Y, Liang X, et al. Biomimetic Barium Titanate/PLA Scaffold with Shape Memory and Bioelectro-Active Capacities Promotes Bone Regeneration. Int J Nanomed. 2025;20:13231-13253. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S524080
  125. Chen S, Zhou X, Wang X, Li H, An R, Qian Y. Magnetical scafford with ROS-scavenging for bone regeneration under static magnetic field. Colloids Surf, B. 2025;245:114245. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.114245
  126. Kumar P, Shamim, Muztaba M, et al. Fused Deposition Modeling 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering Applications: A Review. Ann Biomed Eng. 2024;52(5):1184-1194. doi: 10.1007/s10439-024-03479-z
  127. Wu B, Yang J, Ye J, et al. Extrusion-based 3D printing of cross-scale porous bone scaffolds and their micro-topological structures for bone repair. Biomater Adv. 2026;180:214540. doi: 10.1016/j.bioadv.2025.214540
  128. Manzoli S, Merotto E, Piccoli M, Gobbo P, Todros S, Pavan PG. An Overview of 3D Bioprinting Impact on Cell Viability: From Damage Assessment to Protection Solutions. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16(12):436. doi: 10.3390/jfb16120436
  129. Yogeshwaran S, Goodarzi Hosseinabadi H, Gendy DE, Miri AK. Design considerations and biomaterials selection in embedded extrusion 3D bioprinting. Biomater Sci. 2024;12(18):4506-4518. doi: 10.1039/d4bm00550c
  130. Hinton TJ, Jallerat Q, Palchesko RN, et al. Three-dimensional printing of complex biological structures by freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels. Sci Adv. 2015;1(9):e1500758. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1500758
  131. Xu T, Jin J, Gregory C, Hickman JJ, Boland T. Inkjet printing of viable mammalian cells. Biomaterials. 2005;26(1):93-99. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.04.011
  132. Cui X, Boland T. Human microvasculature fabrication using thermal inkjet printing technology. Biomaterials. 2009;30(31):6221-6227. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.07.056
  133. Gao G, Yonezawa T, Hubbell K, Dai G, Cui X. Inkjet‐bioprinted acrylated peptides and PEG hydrogel with human mesenchymal stem cells promote robust bone and cartilage formation with minimal printhead clogging. Biotechnol J. 2015;10(10):1568-1577. doi: 10.1002/biot.201400635
  134. Gao G, Schilling AF, Yonezawa T, Wang J, Dai G, Cui X. Bioactive nanoparticles stimulate bone tissue formation in bioprinted three‐dimensional scaffold and human mesenchymal stem cells. Biotechnol J. 2014;9(10):1304-1311. doi: 10.1002/biot.201400305
  135. Shubo X, Xue Y, Xinzhi H, et al. Relation between materials, process, structure and property of metallic porous bone scaffolds fabricated by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF): a review. Opt Laser Technol. 2025;191:113377. doi: 10.1016/j.optlastec.2025.113377
  136. Yan K, Ngadiman NHA, Saman MZM, Mustafa NS. Advancements in selective laser melting (SLM) of titanium alloy scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biofabrication. 2025;17(2):022016. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/adc6c0
  137. Shi Y, Zheng Y, Huang C, et al. Influence of Processing Parameters on Additively Manufactured Architected Cellular Metals: Emphasis on Biomedical Applications. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16(2):53. doi: 10.3390/jfb16020053
  138. Savov V, Peev S, Yotsova R, Rogova V-V. Influence of SLM-, SLS-, and DMLS-Manufactured Titanium Meshes on Bone Gain Parameters and Complications: A Systematic Review. Dentistry Journal. 2025;13(9):387. doi: 10.3390/dj13090387
  139. Alparslan C, Bayraktar Ş. Advances in Digital Light Processing (DLP) Bioprinting: A Review of Biomaterials and Its Applications, Innovations, Challenges, and Future Perspectives. Polymers (Basel). 2025;17(9):1287. doi: 10.3390/polym17091287
  140. Li B, Wang Z, Huang C, et al. A comprehensive review on the printing efficiency, precision, and cell viability in 3D bioprinting. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2025;145(1):104448. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2025.104448
  141. Corrado F, Di Maio L, Palmero P, et al. Vat photo-polymerization 3D printing of gradient scaffolds for osteochondral tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2025;200:67-86. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2025.05.042
  142. Jing X, Fu H, Yu B, Sun M, Wang L. Two-photon polymerization for 3D biomedical scaffolds: Overview and updates. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022;10:994355. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.994355
  143. Fu H, Yu B. 3D micro/nano hydrogel structures fabricated by two-photon polymerization for biomedical applications. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024;12:1339450. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1339450
  144. Nguyen AK, Narayan RJ. Two-photon polymerization for biological applications. Mater Today. 2017;20(6):314-322. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2017.06.004
  145. O'Halloran S, Pandit A, Heise A, Kellett A. Two‐Photon Polymerization: Fundamentals, Materials, and Chemical Modification Strategies. Adv Sci. 2022;10(7):2204072. doi: 10.1002/advs.202204072
  146. Binder S, Chalupa-Gantner F, Yoo HW, Zandrini T, Ovsianikov A. Two-photon polymerization system based on a resonant scanner for high-throughput production of tissue engineering microscaffolds. Addit Manuf. 2025;97:104601. doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2024.104601
  147. Zein I, Hutmacher DW, Tan KC, Teoh SH. Fused deposition modeling of novel scaffold architectures for tissue engineering applications. Biomaterials. 2002;23(4):1169-1185. doi: 10.1016/s0142-9612(01)00232-0
  148. Galea Mifsud M, Di-Silvio L, Coward T. Process-Driven Optimization of FDM Porous PEEK Scaffolds for Alloplastic Bone Grafts. ACS Omega. 2025;10(40):47363-47374. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.5c06631
  149. Oberoi G, Nitsch S, Janjić K, et al. The impact of 3D-printed LAY-FOMM 40 and LAY-FOMM 60 on L929 cells and human oral fibroblasts. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2021;25(4):1869-1877. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03491-2
  150. Gómez-Blanco JC, Galván-Chacón V, Patrocinio D, et al. Improving cell viability and velocity in μ-extrusion bioprinting with a novel pre-incubator bioprinter and a standard FDM 3D printing nozzle. Materials. 2021;14(11):3100. doi: 10.3390/ma14113100
  151. Sousa HC, Ruben RB, Viana JC. On the Fused Deposition Modelling of Personalised Bio-Scaffolds: Materials, Design, and Manufacturing Aspects. Bioengineering. 2024;11(8):769. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11080769
  152. Zhou G, Liu W, Zhang Y, et al. Application of three-dimensional printing in interventional medicine. Journal of Interventional Medicine. 2020;3(1):1-16. doi: 10.1016/j.jimed.2020.01.001
  153. Pu X, Wu Y, Liu J, Wu B. 3D bioprinting of microbial-based living materials for advanced energy and environmental applications. Chem & Bio Engineering. 2024;1(7):568-592. doi: 10.1021/cbe.4c00024
  154. Holland I. Extrusion bioprinting: meeting the promise of human tissue biofabrication? Prog Biomed Eng. 2025;7(2):023001. doi: 10.1088/2516-1091/adb254
  155. Li J, Moeinzadeh S, Kim C, et al. Development and systematic characterization of GelMA/alginate/PEGDMA/xanthan gum hydrogel bioink system for extrusion bioprinting. Biomaterials. 2023;293:121969. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121969
  156. Wang D, Wang H, Chen X, et al. Densification, Tailored Microstructure, and Mechanical Properties of Selective Laser Melted Ti–6Al–4V Alloy via Annealing Heat Treatment. Micromachines. 2022;13(2):331. doi: 10.3390/mi13020331
  157. Pasang T, Tavlovich B, Yannay O, et al. Directionally-Dependent Mechanical Properties of Ti6Al4V Manufactured by Electron Beam Melting (EBM) and Selective Laser Melting (SLM). Materials. 2021;14(13):3603. doi: 10.3390/ma14133603
  158. Zhenhuan W, Yu D, Junsi L, et al. Physiochemical and biological evaluation of SLM-manufactured Ti-10Ta-2Nb-2Zr alloy for biomedical implant applications. Biomed Mater. 2020;15(4):045017. doi: 10.1088/1748-605X/ab7ff4
  159. Gao X, Ye X, He Y, Ma S, Liu P. Mechanical Properties and Fatigue Life Estimation of Selective-Laser-Manufactured Ti6Al4V Alloys in a Comparison Between Annealing Treatment and Hot Isostatic Pressing. Materials. 2025;18(15):3475. doi: 10.3390/ma18153475
  160. Arif ZU, Khalid MY, Noroozi R, et al. Additive manufacturing of sustainable biomaterials for biomedical applications. Asian J Pharm Sci. 2023;18(3):100812. doi: 10.1016/j.ajps.2023.100812
  161. Eshraghi S, Das S. Mechanical and microstructural properties of polycaprolactone scaffolds with 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D orthogonally oriented porous architectures produced by selective laser sintering. Acta Biomater. 2010;6(7):2467-2476. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2010.02.002
  162. Tamaddon M, Samizadeh S, Wang L, Blunn G, Liu C. Intrinsic Osteoinductivity of Porous Titanium Scaffold for Bone Tissue Engineering. Int J Biomater. 2017;2017:5093063. doi: 10.1155/2017/5093063
  163. Williams JM, Adewunmi A, Schek RM, et al. Bone tissue engineering using polycaprolactone scaffolds fabricated via selective laser sintering. Biomaterials. 2005;26(23):4817-4827. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.11.057
  164. Lakkala P, Munnangi SR, Bandari S, Repka M. Additive manufacturing technologies with emphasis on stereolithography 3D printing in pharmaceutical and medical applications: A review. Int J Pharm: X. 2023;5:100159. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2023.100159
  165. Zandinejad A, Das O, Barmak AB, Kuttolamadom M, Revilla-León M. The Flexural Strength and Flexural Modulus of Stereolithography Additively Manufactured Zirconia with Different Porosities. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2022;31(5):434-440. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13430
  166. Long T, Tan L, Liu X. Three-dimensional printing in modern orthopedic trauma surgery: a comprehensive analysis of technical evolution and clinical translation. Front Med. 2025;12:1560909. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1560909
  167. Ventisette I, Mattii F, Dallari C, et al. Gold-Hydrogel Nanocomposites for High-Resolution Laser-Based 3D Printing of Scaffolds with SERS-Sensing Properties. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2024;7(7):4497-4509. doi: 10.1021/acsabm.4c00379
  168. Kim J, Danielak M, Lee DH, et al. Advanced dental surgeries using fused filament fabrication and stereolithography printing: Case reports. Clinical Advances in Periodontics. 2026;16(1):132-143. doi: 10.1002/cap.10344
  169. Han Z, Liu S, Qiu K, et al. The enhanced ZrO2 produced by DLP via a reliable plasticizer and its dental application. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2023;141:105751. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.105751
  170. Shen J, Song W, Liu J, et al. 3D bioprinting by reinforced bioink based on photocurable interpenetrating networks for cartilage tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024;254:127671. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.127671
  171. Kornfellner E, Reininger S, Geier S, et al. Mechanical properties of additively manufactured lattice structures composed of zirconia and hydroxyapatite ceramics. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2024;158:106644. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106644
  172. Steyrer B, Neubauer P, Liska R, Stampfl J. Visible Light Photoinitiator for 3D-Printing of Tough Methacrylate Resins. Materials. 2017;10(12):1445. doi: 10.3390/ma10121445
  173. Huang D, Li Z, Li G, et al. Biomimetic structural design in 3D-printed scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Today Bio. 2025;32:101664. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.101664
  174. Zhu Y, Gao H, Qiao Q, et al. Integrating Additive and Traditional Manufacturing for Multiscale Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16(9):349. doi: 10.3390/jfb16090349
  175. Laubach M, Herath B, Bock N, et al. In vivo characterization of 3D-printed polycaprolactone-hydroxyapatite scaffolds with Voronoi design to advance the concept of scaffold-guided bone regeneration. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023;11:1272348. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1272348
  176. Yun X, Li Z, Yan Z, et al. 3D printing combined with thermally induced phase separation for engineering hierarchical osteogenic PLA scaffolds. Mater Today Bio. 2025;35:102621. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.102621
  177. Hill MJ, Qi B, Bayaniahangar R, et al. Nanomaterials for bone tissue regeneration: updates and future perspectives. Nanomedicine. 2019;14(22):2987-3006. doi: 10.2217/nnm-2018-0445
  178. Luo Y, Chen B, Zhang X, Huang S, Wa Q. 3D printed concentrated alginate/GelMA hollow-fibers-packed scaffolds with nano apatite coatings for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;202:366-374. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.01.096
  179. Zhang M, Lin R, Wang X, et al. 3D printing of Haversian bone–mimicking scaffolds for multicellular delivery in bone regeneration. Sci Adv. 2020;6(12):eaaz6725. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaz6725
  180. Xu C, Ivanovski S. Clinical translation of personalized bioengineered implant scaffolds. Nat Rev Bioeng. 2025;3(5):390-407. doi: 10.1038/s44222-024-00269-z
  181. Zhang B, Wang L, Song P, et al. 3D printed bone tissue regenerative PLA/HA scaffolds with comprehensive performance optimizations. Mater Des. 2021;201:109490. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109490
  182. Tu C, Chen J, Huang C, et al. Effects of electromagnetic fields treatment on rat critical-sized calvarial defects with a 3D-printed composite scaffold. Stem Cell Research & Therapy. 2020;11(1):433. doi: 10.1186/s13287-020-01954-7
  183. Ebel F, Schön S, Sharma N, et al. Clinical and patient-reported outcome after patient-specific 3D printer-assisted cranioplasty. Neurosurgical Review. 2023;46(1):93. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02000-9
  184. da Silva Júnior EB, de Aragão AH, de Paula Loureiro M, et al. Cranioplasty with three-dimensional customised mould for polymethylmethacrylate implant: a series of 16 consecutive patients with cost-effectiveness consideration. 3D Print Med. 2021;7(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s41205-021-00096-7
  185. Herath B, Laubach M, Suresh S, et al. Modular design workflow for 3D printable bioresorbable patient-specific bone scaffolds: extended features and clinical validation. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024;12:1404481. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1404481
  186. Liang H, Chen B, Duan S, et al. Treatment of complex limb fractures with 3D printing technology combined with personalized plates: a retrospective study of case series and literature review. Frontiers in Surgery. 2024;11:1383401. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1383401
  187. Zheng P, Yao Q, Mao F, et al. Adhesion, proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells in 3D printed poly-ε-caprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffolds combined with bone marrow clots. Mol Med Rep. 2017;16(4):5078-5084. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2017.7266
  188. Lin Z, Wu M, He H, et al. 3D printing of mechanically stable calcium‐free alginate‐based scaffolds with tunable surface charge to enable cell adhesion and facile biofunctionalization. Adv Funct Mater. 2019;29(9):1808439. doi: 10.1002/adfm.201808439
  189. Yan Y, Chen H, Zhang H, et al. Vascularized 3D printed scaffolds for promoting bone regeneration. Biomaterials. 2019;190-191:97-110. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.10.033
  190. Zhu C, Pongkitwitoon S, Qiu J, Thomopoulos S, Xia Y. Design and Fabrication of a Hierarchically Structured Scaffold for Tendon‐to‐Bone Repair. Adv Mater. 2018;30(16):e1707306. doi: 10.1002/adma.201707306
  191. Nguyen LH, Annabi N, Nikkhah M, et al. Vascularized Bone Tissue Engineering: Approaches for Potential Improvement. Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews. 2012;18(5):363-382. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEB.2012.0012
  192. Boudene I, Bougdid Y. Two-photon polymerization-assisted 3D laser nanoprinting: from fundamentals to modern applications. J Mater Chem C. 2025;13(36):18597-18630. doi: 10.1039/d5tc02037a
  193. Basu P. Advancements in Two-Photon Polymerization (2PP) for Micro and Nanoscale Fabrication. Nanomanufacturing. 2026;6(1):1. doi: 10.3390/nanomanufacturing6010001
  194. Snow F, Doyle SE, Liu E, et al. A detailed guide to melt electro-writing for tissue engineering applications. Biofabrication. 2025;17(4):042004. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/adfbc4
  195. Yin Y, Yang H, Han W, et al. Melt Electrowriting for Biomimetic Tissue Engineering: Advances in Scaffold Design, Materials, and Multifunctional Applications. Polym Adv Technol. 2025;36(1):e70067. doi: 10.1002/pat.70067
  196. Hu Z, Lin H, Wang Z, et al. 3D Printing Hierarchical Porous Nanofibrous Scaffold for Bone Regeneration. Small. 2025;21(2):2405406. doi: 10.1002/smll.202405406
  197. Liu B, Li J, Lei X, et al. 3D-bioprinted functional and biomimetic hydrogel scaffolds incorporated with nanosilicates to promote bone healing in rat calvarial defect model. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2020;112:110905. doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2020.110905
  198. Codrea CI, Baykara D, Mitran R-A, Koyuncu ACÇ, Gunduz O, Ficai A. 3D-bioprinted gelatin methacryloyl-strontium-doped hydroxyapatite composite hydrogels scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration. Polymers (Basel). 2024;16(13):1932. doi: 10.3390/polym16131932
  199. Allen NB, Abar B, Johnson L, Burbano J, Danilkowicz RM, Adams SB. 3D-bioprinted GelMA-gelatin-hydroxyapatite osteoblast-laden composite hydrogels for bone tissue engineering. Bioprinting. 2022;26:e00196. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2022.e00196
  200. Miao S, Zhou J, Liu B, et al. A 3D bioprinted nano-laponite hydrogel construct promotes osteogenesis by activating PI3K/AKT signaling pathway. Mater Today Bio. 2022;16:100342. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100342
  201. Lee SS, Du X, Kim I, Ferguson SJ. Scaffolds for bone-tissue engineering. Matter. 2022;5(9):2722-2759. doi: 10.1016/j.matt.2022.06.003
  202. Li Q, Nikolova MT, Zhang G, et al. Macro-scale, scaffold-assisted model of the human bone marrow endosteal niche using hiPSC-vascularized osteoblastic organoids. Cell Stem Cell. 2025;32(12):1941-1958.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2025.10.009
  203. Chen J, Liang R, Jia S, et al. Spatiotemporal Adaptation in 4D Bioprinting for Dynamic Bone and Cartilage Regeneration. Adv Funct Mater. 2026;36(28):e22357. doi: 10.1002/adfm.202522357
  204. Zarei A, Farazin A. Synergizing additive manufacturing and machine learning for advanced hydroxyapatite scaffold design in bone regeneration. J Aust Ceram Soc. 2025;61(3):797-813. doi: 10.1007/s41779-024-01084-w
Share
Back to top
International Journal of Bioprinting, Electronic ISSN: 2424-8002 Print ISSN: 2424-7723, Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept