Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting represents one of the most developing fields of biomedical engineering and regenerative medicine. 3D bioprinting integrates the use of additive manufacturing used to create devices with the biological understanding of human and animal physiology to create complex tissues and organs from scratch using various bioinks and biological scaffolds. The engineering perspective comes in 3D printing through the lens of biomechanics to implement the material, innovative bioink properties, scaffold designs, and printing techniques for precise layering. However, scientific persuasion must still overcome issues with cell health post printing, construction vascularization & functionality, and generated tissue durability. Through the lens of a medical approach, 3D printing holds a great deal of value for regenerative medicine such as skin grafts, craniofacial surgery, orthopedic procedures, dental solutions, and organs for transplant. There are some clinical limitations which can be overseen through regulatory concerns, biocompatibility challenges, and ethical issues . Finally, from a business standpoint, this market has significant potential. 3D bioprinting affects new market generation from pharmaceutical testing in 3D bioprinted lungs and tumor constructs to expansion in regenerative patches with future goals for anatomical perfection. Bioprinting is already commercially effective in small markets, but larger endeavors are limited due to scalable and reproducible inadequacies in research materials along with high research costs. The market for this is mostly in research and development (R&D) stages and is expected to gradually increase in demand over time in effective pharmaceutical testing and academic solutions, but no solid predictions for widespread clinical applicability for decades. This paper assesses 3D organ bioprinting through the lenses of engineering, medicine, and business to determine the realities of viability, practicality, and ethics in new interdisciplinary integration. Without a multidisciplinary approach gained through an understanding of all three perspectives, 3D bioprinting cannot achieve its full potential to change the world.

Cancer treatments like chemotherapy, though effective, often end up damaging healthy cells along with cancer cells, with fatigue, hair loss, and cognitive impairment being just a few of many negative side effects caused by chemotherapy. Targeted drug delivery aims to minimize, if not eliminate, the undesirable aspects of chemotherapy by directly delivering treatment to cancer cells. Smart nanoparticles are engineered to carry drugs directly to affected sites by responding to specific stimuli, allowing them to provide targeted treatment through either a change in chemical structure, solubility, or a release mechanism linked to a particular type of stimulus. These nanoparticles minimize damage to healthy tissue and increase the therapeutic outcome of treatments. There are many current cases of smart
nanoparticles being used in the field of oncology for cancers such as breast cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer, and brain cancer. Additionally, nanoparticles have shown promising results when used in diagnostics. While smart nanoparticles are promising for cancer drug delivery, drawbacks such as potential toxicity, difficulty achieving targeted delivery, and challenges in scaling up production leave room for more research focused on improving the efficiency of nanoparticles. Smart nanoparticles are an innovative form of drug delivery that, with time, can go on to expand their reach beyond oncology and positively impact the medical field as a whole.

Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes severe motor impairments that significantly reduce patient independence, but cortical networks often remain intact. Non-invasive brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) hold promise for restoring motor control and facilitating rehabilitation after SCI. We conducted a systematic literature review of 100 recent studies on non-invasive BCIs for SCI motor recovery. Our analysis revealed that EEG-based motor-imagery (MI) BCIs paired with functional electrical stimulation (FES) were the predominant approach. These systems often incorporated rich multimodal feedback: many protocols combined visual cues, tactile sensations, and robotic assistance to reinforce the intended movement. We found that providing high density EEG recordings and personalized classifier calibration markedly
improved decoding accuracy and clinical outcomes. Key implementation challenges included unstable FES electrode interfaces, user fatigue during extended training, and high system costs. Additionally, most studies tested only small patient cohorts, making it difficult to generalize results; patients with complete neural degeneration cannot benefit from conventional EEG-BCIs, indicating a need for alternative strategies. We highlight advanced adaptive techniques such as deep-learning decoders and transfer learning that have shown promise in recent studies. Overall, aligning neural intent detection with timely stimulation or feedback appears critical for driving neuroplasticity and enhancing motor recovery.