Bioprinting · Extrusion · Microextrusion-based bioprinting printhead · 2020 · Polymers
A Versatile Open-Source Printhead for Low-Cost 3D Microextrusion-Based Bioprinting
Open-source printhead that converts standard desktop 3D printers into bioprinters
Performance the paper reports
1 of 5- Motion—Motion accuracy: not reported
- Volume—Volumetric accuracy: not reported
- Viability90%Cell viability: reported
- Unattended—Unattended operation: not reported
- Standard—Standard compliance: not reported
- Cell viability90%
[curated metric] Precise temperature control 2-60C; cell viability >90% at 24 h post-printing
How hard this is to adopt
3.6 of 5, higher is easierEach score is shown against the range the other 59 builds actually occupy, because no criterion uses the full 1–5 scale. These describe how reproducible the build is, not how good the science is.
Resolution
3/1–5smallest filament diameter is 210 µm.
Throughput
3/2–5Moderate scalability via modularity, batching, or partial automation.
Parts sourcing
4/2–4Mostly off-the-shelf or kit-based components.
Skill needed
4/2–4Build/operation described as low-skill or basic assembly.
Facilities needed
4/2–4Uses common benchtop/desktop equipment or generic consumables.
Documentation
4/2–5Open resources include several build or operation artifacts.
Validation effort
4/2–4Validation includes standards, benchmarking, replicates, or multi-condition tests.
Cycle time
3/1–4speed evidence suggests comparable to mid-range commercial bioprinters
2 further criteria are recorded but not shown
- Application Level — scored 4 (75% of records share one value), so it cannot separate one build from another.
- Build Time (scored for only 6 of 60 records), so it cannot separate one build from another.
Both remain in the published dataset.
Have you built this?
Report what it took, including attempts that stalled. A failed build tells the next laboratory what the documentation leaves out.
Know what this record is missing?
The index has no licence on the design files or which files exist (CAD, bill of materials, firmware…) for this build. If you are an author or have built it, you know; a GitHub issue pre-filled with this record takes a minute.
Record metadata
Publication data
Matched by title · retrieved 2026-07-21
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting promises to be essential in tissue engineering for solving the rising demand for organs and tissues. Some bioprinters are commercially available, but their impact on the field of Tissue engineering (TE) is still limited due to their cost or difficulty to tune. Herein, we present a low-cost easy-to-build printhead for microextrusion-based bioprinting (MEBB) that can be installed in many desktop 3D printers to transform them into 3D bioprinters. We can extrude bioinks with precise control of print temperature between 2-60 °C. We validated the versatility of the printhead, by assembling it in three low-cost open-source desktop 3D printers. Multiple units of the printhead can also be easily put together in a single printer carriage for building a multi-material 3D bioprinter. Print resolution was evaluated by creating representative calibration models at different temperatures using natural hydrogels such as gelatin and alginate, and synthetic ones like poloxamer. Using one of the three modified low-cost 3D printers, we successfully printed cell-laden lattice constructs with cell viabilities higher than 90% after 24-h post printing. Controlling temperature and pressure according to the rheological properties of the bioinks was essential in achieving optimal printability and great cell viability. The cost per unit of our device, which can be used with syringes of different volume, is less expensive than any other commercially available product. These data demonstrate an affordable open-source printhead with the potential to become a reliable alternative to commercial bioprinters for any laboratory.
Bibliographic details
Access and metrics
Topics and keywords
Funding
- Academy of Finland · 266486, 273689, 276371, 286793
Perspective and practical signals
Why it matters
Shows an open printhead design path for lowering barriers to microextrusion bioprinting.
Limitations
no long-term viability metrics, | Limited print resolution compared to specialized commercial microextrusion systems; shear stress on cells remains a consideration