Bioprinting · 2020
A Custom Ultra-Low-Cost 3D Bioprinter Supports Cell Growth and Differentiation
Advances in 3D bioprinting have allowed the use of stem cells along with biomaterials and growth factors toward novel tissue engineering approaches. However, the cost of these systems along with their consumables is currently extremely high, limiting their applicability.
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
3.5 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
1/1–5Smallest feature/positioning evidence larger than 1000 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
4/2–4Uses common benchtop/desktop equipment or generic consumables.
Documentation
3/2–5Some open documentation or files are available.
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 licence on the design files, link to 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 doi · retrieved 2026-07-21
Abstract
Advances in 3D bioprinting have allowed the use of stem cells along with biomaterials and growth factors toward novel tissue engineering approaches. However, the cost of these systems along with their consumables is currently extremely high, limiting their applicability. To address this, we converted a 3D printer into an open source 3D bioprinter and produced a customized bioink based on accessible alginate/gelatin precursors, leading to a cost-effective solution. The bioprinter's resolution, including line width, spreading ratio and extrusion uniformity measurements, along with the rheological properties of the bioinks were analyzed, revealing high bioprinting accuracy within the printability window. Following the bioprinting process, cell survival and proliferation were validated on HeLa Kyoto and HEK293T cell lines. In addition, we isolated and 3D bioprinted postnatal neural stem cell progenitors derived from the mouse subventricular zone as well as mesenchymal stem cells derived from mouse bone marrow. Our results suggest that our low-cost 3D bioprinter can support cell proliferation and differentiation of two different types of primary stem cell populations, indicating that it can be used as a reliable tool for developing efficient research models for stem cell research and tissue engineering.
Bibliographic details
Access and metrics
Topics and keywords
Perspective and practical signals
Why it matters
No narrative note curated yet.
Limitations
No limitation note curated yet.