Bioprinting · Extrusion · 2021 · HardwareX
Open-source hybrid 3D-bioprinter for simultaneous printing of thermoplastics and hydrogels
organ model development. Various 3D-bioprinting technologies and systems have been developed and are partly commercially available.
Performance the paper reports
0 of 5- Motion—Motion accuracy: not reported
- Volume—Volumetric accuracy: not reported
- Viability—Cell viability: not reported
- Unattended—Unattended operation: not reported
- Standard—Standard compliance: not reported
The full text was read and states no figure for any of the five.
How hard this is to adopt
3.9 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
3/1–5Smallest feature/positioning evidence about 445 µm.
Throughput
4/2–5Evidence of parallel, plate-scale, multi-head, or unattended operation.
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
3/2–4Requires accessible but nontrivial lab/maker equipment.
Documentation
5/2–5Multiple open resources named: files/code/BOM/protocol documentation/troubleshooting
Validation effort
4/2–4Validation includes standards, benchmarking, replicates, or multi-condition tests.
Cycle time
4/1–4Speed evidence suggests rapid, real-time, or automated operation.
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 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 doi · retrieved 2026-07-21
Abstract
organ model development. Various 3D-bioprinting technologies and systems have been developed and are partly commercially available. Here, we present the construction and characterization of an open-source low-cost 3D-bioprinter that allows the alternated microextrusion of hydrogel and fused deposition modeling (FDM) of thermoplastic filaments. The presented 3D-bioprinter is based on a conventional Prusa i3 MK3 printer and features two independent printheads: the original FDM-head and a syringe-based microextrusion printhead for soft materials. Modifications were designed modularly to fit various syringe formats or heating elements to the device. The bioprinter is the first hybrid DIY 3D-bioprinter that allows switching between materials as often as required during a print run to produce complex multi-material constructs with arbitrary patterns in each layer. For validation of the printer, two designs suitable for relevant bioprinting applications were realized. First, a porous plastic construct filled with hydrogel was printed, serving as a mechanically stable bone replacement tissue model. Second, a plastic chamber, which might be used in organ-on-a-chip applications, was printed with an extruded silicone sealing that enables the liquid-tight attachment of glass slides to the top and bottom of the chamber.
Bibliographic details
Access and metrics
Topics and keywords
Funding
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung Dienststelle Bonn
Perspective and practical signals
Why it matters
Open-hardware path to hybrid scaffolds (structural polymer + hydrogel/cell-laden inks).
Limitations
No limitation note curated yet.