AccScience Publishing / IJB / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/IJB026320336
Submit to IJB
Cite this article
28
Download
728
Views
Related Info Links
Google Scholar
More by Authors Links
Salil Desai
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Predictive machine learning models for printability assessment in extrusion-based 3D bioprinting

Joan. C. Isichei1 ,  Siyuan Li2 ,  Joshua Copus2 ,  Sang Jin Lee2 ,  Izabele Heyward1 ,  Salil Desai1,2*
Show Less
1 Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, College of Engineering, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, Greensboro, North Carolina , United States of America
2 Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina , United States of America
IJB, 026320336 https://doi.org/10.36922/IJB026320336
Received: 4 August 2026 | Revised: 4 September 2026 | Accepted: 9 September 2026 | Published online: 9 September 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Download PDF
XML
Cite
Abstract

Bioprinting has great potential in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications due to the possibility of creating functional tissue replacements for damaged tissues or organs. However, current methods for optimizing printing parameters are time-consuming and heavily rely on operators’ experience. In this study, Pluronic F127 and sodium alginate–Laponite (Alg-Lap) bioinks were used to evaluate the quality of four bioprinted constructs: tubular, angular, crosshatch, and overhang structures. Machine learning (ML) algorithms, including multilayer perceptron (MLP), random forest (RF), Gaussian naive Bayes (GNB), classification and regression trees (CART), support vector machines (SVM), and logistic regression (LR), were evaluated for classifying constructs into print-quality categories using pre-print parameters and post-print geometry-specific quality measurements. RF performed best for the tubular, crosshatch, and overhang structures, achieving classification accuracies of 91.9%, 95.3%, and 96.0%, respectively, while MLP performed best for the angular structure, achieving 96.3% accuracy. Balanced accuracies for these best-performing models were 85.8%, 91.8%, 86.9%, and 90.8% for the tubular, crosshatch, overhang, and angular structures, respectively. These findings demonstrate the potential of ML-based quality classification to support more reproducible assessment of extrusion-based bioprinting outcomes, advancing tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications while enhancing efficiency and reproducibility.

Keywords
3D bioprinting
Bioinks
Machine learning
Predictive models
Printability
Funding
The authors would like to express their gratitude for funding support from the National Science Foundation Grant (NSF Engines Award #2315654).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
References
  1. Murphy SV, De Coppi P, Atala A. Opportunities and challenges of translational 3D bioprinting. Nat Biomed Eng. 2020;4(4):370-380. doi: 10.1038/s41551-019-0471-7
  2. Mao H, Yang L, Zhu H, et al. Recent advances and challenges in materials for 3D bioprinting. Prog Nat Sci Mater Int. 2020;30(5):618-634. doi: 10.1016/j.pnsc.2020.09.015
  3. Fang Y, Guo Y, Liu T, et al. Advances in 3D bioprinting. Chin J Mech Eng Addit Manuf Front. 2022;1(1):100011. doi: 10.1016/j.cjmeam.2022.100011
  4. Matai I, Kaur G, Seyedsalehi A, McClinton A, Laurencin CT. Progress in 3D bioprinting technology for tissue/organ regenerative engineering. Biomaterials. 2020;226:119536. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119536
  5. Schwab A, Levato R, D'Este M, Piluso S, Eglin D, Malda J. Printability and shape fidelity of bioinks in 3D bioprinting. Chem Rev. 2020;120(19):11028-11055. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00084
  6. Zhang YS, Haghiashtiani G, Hübscher T, et al. 3D extrusion bioprinting. Nat Rev Methods Primers. 2021;1(1):75. doi: 10.1038/s43586-021-00073-8
  7. Ji S, Guvendiren M. Complex 3D bioprinting methods. APL Bioeng. 2021;5(1):011508. doi: 10.1063/5.0034901
  8. Cui X, Li J, Hartanto Y, et al. Advances in extrusion 3D bioprinting: a focus on multicomponent hydrogel-based bioinks. Adv Healthc Mater. 2020;9(15):e1901648. doi: 10.1002/adhm.201901648
  9. Weng T, Zhang W, Xia Y, et al. 3D bioprinting for skin tissue engineering: current status and perspectives. J Tissue Eng. 2021;12:20417314211028574. doi: 10.1177/20417314211028574
  10. Gungor-Ozkerim PS, Inci I, Zhang YS, Khademhosseini A, Dokmeci MR. Bioinks for 3D bioprinting: an overview. Biomater Sci. 2018;6(5):915-946. doi: 10.1039/C7BM00765E
  11. Gopinathan J, Noh I. Recent trends in bioinks for 3D printing. Biomater Res. 2018;22:11. doi: 10.1186/s40824-018-0122-1
  12. Donderwinkel I, Van Hest JCM, Cameron NR. Bio-inks for 3D bioprinting: recent advances and future prospects. Polym Chem. 2017;8(31):4451-4471. doi: 10.1039/C7PY00826K
  13. Chimene D, Lennox KK, Kaunas RR, Gaharwar AK. Advanced bioinks for 3D printing: a materials science perspective. Ann Biomed Eng. 2016;44(6):2090-2102. doi: 10.1007/s10439-016-1638-y
  14. Lee JM, Yeong WY. Design and printing strategies in 3D bioprinting of cell-hydrogels: a review. Adv Healthc Mater. 2016;5(22):2856-2865. doi: 10.1002/adhm.201600435
  15. Jose RR, Rodriguez MJ, Dixon TA, Omenetto FG, Kaplan DL. Evolution of bioinks and additive manufacturing technologies for 3D bioprinting. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2016;2(10):1662-1678. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00088
  16. Parupelli SK, Saudi S, Bhattarai N, Desai S. 3D printing of PCL-ceramic composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications. Int J Bioprint. 2023;9(6):0196. doi: 10.36922/ijb.0196
  17. Ogunsanya M, Desai S. Physics-based and data-driven modeling for biomanufacturing 4.0. Manuf Lett. 2023;36:91-95. doi: 10.1016/j.mfglet.2023.04.003
  18. Tettey F, Saudi S, Davies D, et al. Fabrication and characterization of Zn particle incorporated fibrous scaffolds for potential application in tissue healing and regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2023;15(42):48913-48929. doi: 10.1021/acsami.3c09793
  19. Adarkwa E, Roy A, Ohodnicki J, Desai S. 3D printing of drug-eluting bioactive multifunctional coatings for orthopedic applications. Int J Bioprint. 2023;9(2):661. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v9i2.661
  20. Lee SC, Gillispie G, Prim P, Lee SJ. Physical and chemical factors influencing the printability of hydrogel-based extrusion bioinks. Chem Rev. 2020;120(19):10834-10886. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00015
  21. Gillispie G, Prim P, Copus J, et al. Assessment methodologies for extrusion-based bioink printability. Biofabrication. 2020;12(2):022003. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab6f0d
  22. Ogunsanya M, Desai S. Predictive modeling of additive manufacturing process using deep learning algorithm. In: Ellis K, Ferrell W, Knapp J, eds. Proceedings of the IISE Annual Conference & Expo 2022. Norcross, GA: Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers; 2022. Accessed July 15, 2026. https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10347277
  23. Isichei JC, Khorsandroo S, Desai S. Cybersecurity and privacy in smart bioprinting. Bioprinting. 2023;36:e00321. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00321
  24. Nandipati M, Fatoki O, Desai S. Bridging nanomanufacturing and artificial intelligence—a comprehensive review. Materials (Basel). 2024;17(7):1621. doi: 10.3390/ma17071621
  25. Ogunsanya M, Isichei J, Desai S. Grid search hyperparameter tuning in additive manufacturing processes. Manuf Lett. 2023;35:1031-1042. doi: 10.1016/j.mfglet.2023.08.056
  26. Ng WL, Vyas C, Huang B, Yeong WY, Bartolo P. Advanced bioprinting strategies for fabrication of biomimetic tissues and organs. Int J Extrem Manuf. 2025;7(6):062006. doi: 10.1088/2631-7990/adeee0
  27. Huang W, Chen S, Li K, et al. Nanoengineered extrusion-aligned tract bioprinting enables functional repair of spinal cord injuries. Cell Stem Cell. 2026;33(2):340-354.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2025.12.021
  28. Lee JS, Cha JH, Kim BS. Artificial intelligence in 3D bioprinting and biofabrication: a validation-stringency assessment. Biofabrication. 2026;18(3):032003. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ae7b07
  29. Zhang C, Elvitigala KCML, Sakai S. Generative AI-guided in silico closed-loop optimisation of deposition morphology for 3D bioprinting applications. Virtual Phys Prototyp. 2026;21(1):e2671497. doi: 10.1080/17452759.2026.2671497
  30. Yu C, Jiang J. A perspective on using machine learning in 3D bioprinting. Int J Bioprint. 2020;6(1):253. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v6i1.253
  31. Bonatti AF, Vozzi G, De Maria C. Enhancing quality control in bioprinting through machine learning. Biofabrication. 2024;16(2):022001. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ad2189
  32. Armstrong AA, Norato J, Alleyne AG, Wagoner Johnson AJ. Direct process feedback in extrusion-based 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication. 2020;12(1):015017. doi: 10.1088/1758-5090/ab4d97
  33. Krishna DV, Sankar MR. Machine learning-assisted extrusion-based 3D bioprinting for tissue regeneration applications. Ann 3D Print Med. 2023;12:100132. doi: 10.1016/j.stlm.2023.100132
  34. An J, Chua CK, Mironov V. Application of machine learning in 3D bioprinting: focus on development of big data and digital twin. Int J Bioprint. 2021;7(1):342. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v7i1.342
  35. Ramesh S, Deep A, Tamayol A, Kamaraj AB, Mahajan C, Madihally S. Advancing 3D bioprinting through machine learning and artificial intelligence. Bioprinting. 2024;38:e00331. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2024.e00331
  36. Wang J, Cui Z, Maniruzzaman M. Bioprinting: a focus on improving bioink printability and cell performance based on different process parameters. Int J Pharm. 2023;640:123020. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2023.123020
  37. Rahmani Dabbagh S, Ozcan O, Tasoglu S. Machine learning-enabled optimization of extrusion-based 3D printing. Methods. 2022;206:27-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2022.08.002
  38. Fu Z, Angeline V, Sun W. Evaluation of printing parameters on 3D extrusion printing of Pluronic hydrogels and machine learning guided parameter recommendation. Int J Bioprint. 2021;7(4):434. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v7i4.434
  39. Ruberu K, Senadeera M, Rana S, et al. Coupling machine learning with 3D bioprinting to fast track optimisation of extrusion printing. Appl Mater Today. 2021;22:100914. doi: 10.1016/j.apmt.2020.100914
  40. Bonatti AF, Vozzi G, Chua CK, De Maria C. A deep learning quality control loop of the extrusion-based bioprinting process. Int J Bioprint. 2022;8(4):620. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v8i4.620
  41. Conev A, Litsa EE, Perez MR, Diba M, Mikos AG, Kavraki LE. Machine learning-guided three-dimensional printing of tissue engineering scaffolds. Tissue Eng Part A. 2020;26(23-24):1359-1368. doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2020.0191
  42. Rafieyan S, Vasheghani-Farahani E, Baheiraei N, Keshavarz H. MLATE: machine learning for predicting cell behavior on cardiac tissue engineering scaffolds. Comput Biol Med. 2023;158:106804. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.106804
  43. Williams D, Thayer P, Martinez H, Gatenholm E, Khademhosseini A. A perspective on the physical, mechanical and biological specifications of bioinks and the development of functional tissues in 3D bioprinting. Bioprinting. 2018;9:19-36. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2018.02.003
  44. Sun J, Yao K, An J, Jing L, Huang K, Huang D. Machine learning and 3D bioprinting. Int J Bioprint. 2023;9(4):717. doi: 10.18063/ijb.717
  45. Suntornnond R, Tan EYS, An J, Chua CK. A highly printable and biocompatible hydrogel composite for direct printing of soft and perfusable vasculature-like structures. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):16902. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17198-0
  46. Hu T, Cai Z, Yin R, Zhang W, Bao C, Zhu L, Zhang H. 3D embedded printing of complex biological structures with supporting bath of Pluronic F-127. Polymers (Basel). 2023;15(17):3493. doi: 10.3390/polym15173493
  47. Muñoz-Pérez E, Pérez-Valle A, Igartua M, Santos-Vizcaíno E, Hernández RM. High resolution and fidelity 3D printing of Laponite and alginate ink hydrogels for tunable biomedical applications. Biomater Adv. 2023;149:213414. doi: 10.1016/j.bioadv.2023.213414
  48. Axpe E, Oyen ML. Applications of alginate-based bioinks in 3D bioprinting. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(12):1976. doi: 10.3390/ijms17121976
  49. Kolesky DB, Truby RL, Gladman AS, Busbee TA, Homan KA, Lewis JA. 3D bioprinting of vascularized, heterogeneous cell-laden tissue constructs. Adv Mater. 2014;26(19):3124-3130. doi: 10.1002/adma.201305506
  50. Gao Q, Kim BS, Gao G. Advanced strategies for 3D bioprinting of tissue and organ analogs using alginate hydrogel bioinks. Mar Drugs. 2021;19(12):708. doi: 10.3390/md19120708
  51. Guvendiren M, Molde J, Soares RMD, Kohn J. Designing biomaterials for 3D printing. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2016;2(10):1679-1693. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00121
  52. Gillispie GJ, Han A, Uzun-Per M, et al. The influence of printing parameters and cell density on bioink printing outcomes. Tissue Eng Part A. 2020;26(23-24):1349-1358. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2020.0210
  53. Gillispie GJ, Copus J, Uzun-Per M, et al. The correlation between rheological properties and extrusion-based printability in bioink artifact quantification. Mater Des. 2023;233:112237. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2023.112237
  54. Kalantary S, Jahani A, Jahani R. MLR and ANN approaches for prediction of synthetic/natural nanofibers diameter in environmental and medical applications. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):8117. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-65121-x
  55. He H, Yang Y, Pan Y. Machine learning for continuous liquid interface production: printing speed modelling. J Manuf Syst. 2019;50:236-246. doi: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2019.01.004
  56. Zanderigo G, Bracco F, Semeraro Q, Colosimo BM. In-situ printability maps: a new approach for in-situ printability assessment with application to extrusion-based bioprinting. Bioprinting. 2023;36:e00320. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00320
  57. Jin Z, Zhang Z, Shao X, Gu GX. Monitoring anomalies in 3D bioprinting with deep neural networks. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2023;9(7):3945-3952. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c01761
  58. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2009. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7
  59. Chen H, Liu Y, Balabani S, Hirayama R, Huang J. Machine learning in predicting printable biomaterial formulations for direct ink writing. Research (Wash D C). 2023;6:0197. doi: 10.34133/research.0197
  60. Malekpour A, Chen X. Printability and cell viability in extrusion-based bioprinting from experimental, computational, and machine learning views. J Funct Biomater. 2022;13(2):40. doi: 10.3390/jfb13020040
  61. Xu H, Liu Q, Casillas J, et al. Prediction of cell viability in dynamic optical projection stereolithography-based bioprinting using machine learning. J Intell Manuf. 2022;33(4):995-1005. doi: 10.1007/s10845-020-01708-5
Share
Back to top
International Journal of Bioprinting, Electronic ISSN: 2424-8002 Print ISSN: 2424-7723, Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept