Bioprinting · Extrusion · 2022 · (see PMC)
Designing cost-effective open-source multihead 3D bioprinters
For the past decade, additive manufacturing has resulted in significant advances toward fabricating anatomic-size patient-specific scaffolds for tissue models and regenerative medicine. This can be attributed to the development of advanced bioinks capable of precise deposition of cells and biomaterials.
Performance the paper reports
1 of 5- Motion—Motion accuracy: not reported
- Volume—Volumetric accuracy: not reported
- Viability85%Cell viability: reported
- Unattended—Unattended operation: not reported
- Standard—Standard compliance: not reported
- Cell viability85%
Cell viability was consistently >85% for a period inkformulationusedhere. of 3 months indicating good biocompatibility and suitability Before loading the bioink, the printheads were cleaned of NICE bioink for 3D bioprinting using dual extru
How hard this is to adopt
2.9 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
2/1–5Smallest feature/positioning evidence about 500 µm.
Throughput
2/2–5Operation appears single-unit or manually constrained.
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
2/2–4Requires specialized facilities, equipment, or consumables.
Documentation
4/2–5Open resources include several build or operation artifacts.
Validation effort
2/2–4Minimal quantitative validation evident, lacks standards, benchmarking, replicates or multi-condition tests.
Cycle time
3/1–4Speed evidence suggests typical operation
2 further criteria are recorded but not shown
- Application Level — scored 3 (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 cost 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
For the past decade, additive manufacturing has resulted in significant advances toward fabricating anatomic-size patient-specific scaffolds for tissue models and regenerative medicine. This can be attributed to the development of advanced bioinks capable of precise deposition of cells and biomaterials. Full abstract at the publisher
Bibliographic details
Access and metrics
Topics and keywords
Perspective and practical signals
Why it matters
Practical open-source path to multi-material/multihead bioprinting; widely replicable.
Limitations
No limitation note curated yet.