A recent review by researchers from China’s Dalian Polytechnic University and National Engineering Research Centre of Seafood, outlined how the field had progressed from a niche innovation to a maturing technology.
They noted that it could reshape personalised nutrition, specialised diets, and even industrial-scale production.
3D-printed food has the potential to make meals safer, smarter, and more tailored to individual needs. However, scaling this technology requires solving challenges in food safety and consumer acceptance.
Evolving printing methods
The review compared the core technologies shaping today’s market. Extrusion-based printing — similar to plastics manufacturing — remained the most widely used, with chocolate, cheese, and minced meat among the most common ‘inks’.
Inkjet printing, which sprays liquid food materials with high precision, was found to be better suited for decorative applications. Binder jetting, which solidifies powders with liquid binders, offered structural versatility but raised challenges in speed and texture consistency.
At the same time, emerging approaches have been pushing boundaries further. Multi-axis printers allow simultaneous use of several nozzles for faster, multi-material designs, while coaxial printing can create hollow or layered structures — useful for designing foods with customised textures. Additionally, laser-assisted systems can combine shaping and cooking in one process, and microwave- and ultrasonic-assisted methods are being tested to improve efficiency and hygiene.
Looking ahead, microfluidic 3D printing — which uses microscopic channels to control ingredient flow — may represent the most advanced platform.
Researchers have already encapsulated vitamin A in microgels that resist stomach acid but release in the intestine, showing promise for precise nutrient delivery.
Applications across markets
Currently, food 3D printing is already being tested in clinical and consumer contexts. For elderly populations with chewing or swallowing difficulties, coaxial printing has been used to restructure chicken surimi into softer, fibre-like textures.
Adding mealworm protein has also improved water retention and reduced hardness, producing easier-to-consume products that retain nutritional value.
In alternative proteins, 3D-printed beef and fish pastes are being engineered to mimic marbling or fibrous structures.
Adjusting fat content and infill density enables textures that resemble high-quality cuts of meat, while imitation seafood products are being printed to replicate the flakiness of crab and other species.
The confectionery and dairy sectors are also proving fertile ground. Chocolate’s natural extrusion properties make it a favourite testbed, with multi-material printers creating intricate layered designs combining chocolate syrups, creams, and fruit fillings.
Consumer and regulatory hurdles
While technical progress is advancing, consumer trust remains uncertain. Surveys cited in the review highlighted scepticism around the taste, nutrition, and “naturalness” of 3D-printed food.
Price is another sticking point, as printing often raises production costs compared to traditional methods.
The researchers also stated that first impressions mattered, and that the look and presentation of 3D-printed foods could strongly influence consumer opinion. As such, they said, communication strategies were needed to build trust.
Regulators are beginning to act. In the EU, 3D-printed foods fall under the Novel Food Regulation, requiring safety assessments prior to market entry.
In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has no specific category for food printing but is referencing existing frameworks used for 3D-printed medical products.
The review called for a dedicated regulatory framework to cover raw materials, equipment, hygiene, and product labelling, alongside international standardisation to prevent fragmented rules across regions.
Safety and processing challenges
Food safety remains a central concern. Printing involves nozzles, tubes, and contact surfaces that are difficult to clean, creating risks of microbial growth and cross-contamination, and switching between food inks compounds the challenge.
Post-processing steps — such as cooking, curing, or pasteurisation — are often required to ensure microbial safety and achieve desired textures. To this end, researchers are testing laser- and microwave-assisted methods to make this stage more efficient, while lowering energy use.
Another challenge is the reliance on chemical additives, such as stabilisers and thickeners to ensure printability. The goal is to reduce reliance on additives while maintaining structural integrity.
Next frontier: 4D printing
Researchers are now looking beyond static structures to dynamic, ‘smart’ foods that respond to environmental triggers.
The answer could lie in 4D printing, which could enable products that change shape or release nutrients when exposed to heat, pH, or moisture.
Potential applications include multi-layered capsules that gradually release vitamins during digestion, or performance products designed to supply nutrients to athletes at specific stages of activity.
Sustainability is yet another driver. 3D printing could reduce food waste by maximising the use of raw materials, repurposing by-products, and enabling localised production near end users.
Implications for industry
For manufacturers and suppliers in the nutrition and supplementation sector, 3D printing opens the door to highly customised solutions.
Potential applications include fortified snacks, functional foods, and tailored supplement delivery systems.
However, realising these opportunities will require significant investment in equipment, rigorous safety validation, and robust consumer education. Early adopters will also need to navigate a fragmented regulatory landscape, and demonstrate clear nutritional and commercial benefits in order to win trust.
Future outlook
The review leaves little doubt that food 3D printing has matured beyond the experimental stage. The focus now is on addressing cost, safety, and acceptance barriers that stand between prototypes and scalable production.
For the nutrition and supplementation industry, the technology promises precision, flexibility, and efficiency that traditional processing cannot match.
Whether it becomes mainstream will depend on how quickly these challenges are overcome — and whether industry leaders are willing to take the first steps toward commercialisation.
The review concluded: “Food safety, consumer acceptance, and the establishment of relevant regulations and standards are critical steps in advancing the development of 3D-printed foods, and serve as important benchmarks for evaluating their commercial viability.
In future research, priority should be given to the development and application of smart responsive materials, facilitating the transition from 3D printing to 4D printing technology.
“This will enable the creation of ‘smart foods’ capable of autonomously adjusting their structures and properties in response to environmental conditions, offering consumers safer, smarter, and more personalized food choices, and driving innovation in the food manufacturing industry.”
Source: MDPI Foods
“Food 3D Printing Equipment and Innovation: Precision Meets Edibility”
https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14122066
Authors: Xiao Shuailei, et al.
