3D bioprinting in tissue engineering: current state-of-the-art and challenges towards system standardization and clinical translation

Over the past decade, three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has made significant progress, transforming into a key innovation in tissue engineering. Despite the early strides, critical challenges remain in 3D bioprinting that must be addressed to accelerate clinical translation. In particular, there is still a long way to go before functionally-mature, clinically-relevant tissue equivalents are developed. Current limitations range from the sub-optimal bioink properties and degree of biomimicry of bioprintable architectures, to the lack of stem/progenitor cells for massive cell expansion, and fundamental knowledge regarding<i>in vitro</i>culturing conditions. In addition to these problems, the absence of guidelines and well-regulated international standards is creating uncertainty among the biofabrication community stakeholders regarding the reliable and scalable production processes. This review aims at exploring the latest developments in 3D bioprinting approaches, including various additive manufacturing techniques and their applications. A thorough discussion of common bioprinting techniques and recent progresses are compiled along with notable recent studies. Later we discuss the current challenges in clinical application of 3D bioprinting and the major bottlenecks in the commercialization of 3D bioprinted tissue equivalents, including the longevity of bioprinted organs, meeting biomechanical requirements, and the often underrated ethical and legal aspects. Amidst the progress of regulatory efforts for regenerative medicine, we also present an overview of the current regulatory concerns which should be taken into account to translate bioprinted tissues into clinical practice. At last, this review emphasizes future directions in 3D bioprinting that includes the transformative ideas such as bioprinting in microgravity and the integration of artificial intelligence. The study concludes with a discussion on the need for collaborative efforts in resolving the technical and regulatory constraints to improve the quality, reliability, and reproducibility of bioprinted tissue equivalents to ultimately accomplish their successful clinical implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biofabrication
Published
2025-06-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ade47a
Citations
16
Primary Topic
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.79
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

3D bioprinting in tissue engineering: current state-of-the-art and challenges towards system standardization and clinical translation

Kiran Yellappa Vajanthri, Timothy Esworthy, Dishary Banerjee, Valentina Onesto et al.
16 citations
Biofabrication
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
10.79
article

3D bioprinting in tissue engineering: current state-of-the-art and challenges towards system standardization and clinical translation

Kiran Yellappa Vajanthri, Timothy Esworthy, Dishary Banerjee, Valentina Onesto, Angela Panoskaltsis‐Mortari, A. Viswanath, Lorenzo Moroni, Caleb Vogt, Marco Costantini, Aaron O'Donnell, Alessandro Polini, Tarun Agarwal, Lijie Grace Zhang, Ibrahim Tarik Ozbolat, Shengbo Guo, Tapas K. Maiti, Haitao Cui
article en
16 citations

Abstract

Over the past decade, three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has made significant progress, transforming into a key innovation in tissue engineering. Despite the early strides, critical challenges remain in 3D bioprinting that must be addressed to accelerate clinical translation. In particular, there is still a long way to go before functionally-mature, clinically-relevant tissue equivalents are developed. Current limitations range from the sub-optimal bioink properties and degree of biomimicry of bioprintable architectures, to the lack of stem/progenitor cells for massive cell expansion, and fundamental knowledge regarding<i>in vitro</i>culturing conditions. In addition to these problems, the absence of guidelines and well-regulated international standards is creating uncertainty among the biofabrication community stakeholders regarding the reliable and scalable production processes. This review aims at exploring the latest developments in 3D bioprinting approaches, including various additive manufacturing techniques and their applications. A thorough discussion of common bioprinting techniques and recent progresses are compiled along with notable recent studies. Later we discuss the current challenges in clinical application of 3D bioprinting and the major bottlenecks in the commercialization of 3D bioprinted tissue equivalents, including the longevity of bioprinted organs, meeting biomechanical requirements, and the often underrated ethical and legal aspects. Amidst the progress of regulatory efforts for regenerative medicine, we also present an overview of the current regulatory concerns which should be taken into account to translate bioprinted tissues into clinical practice. At last, this review emphasizes future directions in 3D bioprinting that includes the transformative ideas such as bioprinting in microgravity and the integration of artificial intelligence. The study concludes with a discussion on the need for collaborative efforts in resolving the technical and regulatory constraints to improve the quality, reliability, and reproducibility of bioprinted tissue equivalents to ultimately accomplish their successful clinical implementation.

BiofabricationVol. 17(4)
Pennsylvania State University (US), Chaitanya Bharathi Institute of Technology (IN), Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur (IN), Chongqing University (CN), George Washington University (US), Maastricht University (NL), University of California San Diego (US), Istituto di Nanotecnologia (IT), Center for Advanced Biomaterials for Healthcare (IT), Twin Cities Orthopedics (US), Ministry of Education (TH), Washington University Medical Center (US), University of Minnesota Medical Center (US), National Research Council (IT), Institute of Physical Chemistry (PL), Cukurova University (TR), Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (US), Polish Academy of Sciences (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
10.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.