Stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted constructs for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration: Shape-morphing mechanisms, cell-laden bioink engineering, and preclinical outcomes

Introduction: Musculoskeletal disorders impose a substantial global disability burden. Conventional 3D bioprinting cannot replicate the dynamic, anisotropic architecture of bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle, and cardiac muscle. Four-dimensional (4D) bioprinting addresses this by integrating stimuli-responsive materials into constructs, enabling programmed shape transformation and adaptive behavior following implantation. Methods: This narrative review examines primary experimental research on stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted musculoskeletal constructs, drawing on in vitro, in vivo, and combined outcomes from leading peer-reviewed journals. Results: Evidence spans four stimuli modalities - magnetic actuation, near-infrared (NIR) photothermal response, thermoresponsive swelling-shrinking transitions, and shape memory polymer (SMP) recovery - applied across bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle, and cardiac constructs. Bioink formulations from silk fibroin-gelatin composites and alginate-polydopamine inks to GelMA-based hydrogels and polyester SMPs present trade-offs between printability, shape fidelity, and cellular compatibility. Cross-study synthesis identifies stiffness trajectory, architectural anisotropy, and dynamic deformation as primary mechano-biological axes directing cell fate decisions. Preclinical studies document encouraging ossification and chondrogenesis outcomes, though constructs fall short of native tissue mechanical benchmarks. Conclusion: Translational barriers range from fundamental physical constraints - including the mechanical performance gap and stimulus penetration depth limitations - to incremental engineering challenges amenable to near-term resolution. Passive hydration-driven deployment represents the most clinically tractable strategy, while multifunctional bioinks integrating stimuli-responsiveness, bioactive factor presentation, and cell-instructive surface chemistry define the primary material development direction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Regenerative Therapy
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reth.2026.101119
Primary Topic
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted constructs for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration: Shape-morphing mechanisms, cell-laden bioink engineering, and preclinical outcomes

Suleiman Ibrahim Mohammad, Pardeep Singh Bains, Ahmed Fekry Salman, Manveet Singh et al.
Regenerative Therapy
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
article

Stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted constructs for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration: Shape-morphing mechanisms, cell-laden bioink engineering, and preclinical outcomes

Suleiman Ibrahim Mohammad, Pardeep Singh Bains, Ahmed Fekry Salman, Manveet Singh, Mohammad Ebrahim Astaneh, Narges Fereydouni, Asokan Vasudevan, Jasgurpreet Singh Chohan, Ripendeep Singh, Parvoz Abdulkhakimov
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Musculoskeletal disorders impose a substantial global disability burden. Conventional 3D bioprinting cannot replicate the dynamic, anisotropic architecture of bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle, and cardiac muscle. Four-dimensional (4D) bioprinting addresses this by integrating stimuli-responsive materials into constructs, enabling programmed shape transformation and adaptive behavior following implantation. Methods: This narrative review examines primary experimental research on stimuli-responsive 4D-bioprinted musculoskeletal constructs, drawing on in vitro, in vivo, and combined outcomes from leading peer-reviewed journals. Results: Evidence spans four stimuli modalities - magnetic actuation, near-infrared (NIR) photothermal response, thermoresponsive swelling-shrinking transitions, and shape memory polymer (SMP) recovery - applied across bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle, and cardiac constructs. Bioink formulations from silk fibroin-gelatin composites and alginate-polydopamine inks to GelMA-based hydrogels and polyester SMPs present trade-offs between printability, shape fidelity, and cellular compatibility. Cross-study synthesis identifies stiffness trajectory, architectural anisotropy, and dynamic deformation as primary mechano-biological axes directing cell fate decisions. Preclinical studies document encouraging ossification and chondrogenesis outcomes, though constructs fall short of native tissue mechanical benchmarks. Conclusion: Translational barriers range from fundamental physical constraints - including the mechanical performance gap and stimulus penetration depth limitations - to incremental engineering challenges amenable to near-term resolution. Passive hydration-driven deployment represents the most clinically tractable strategy, while multifunctional bioinks integrating stimuli-responsiveness, bioactive factor presentation, and cell-instructive surface chemistry define the primary material development direction.

Regenerative TherapyVol. 32
Chandigarh University (IN), Al-Ahliyya Amman University (JO), INTI International University (MY), Marwadi University (IN), Samarkand State Medical Institute (UZ), Fasa University of Medical Sciences (IR), Sohar University (OM), Chitkara University (IN), Sharda University (IN), University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar (PK)
Fasa University of Medical Sciences
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
3D Printing in Biomedical Research
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.