Page 135 - IJB-10-1

International Journal of Bioprinting Bioprinting organoids for toxicity testing

Table 1. Types, advantages, and disadvantages of materials for 3D bioprinting
Author Material Bioink Printing Advantages Disadvantages
method
Yang et al. (2021) [1] Synthetic polymer Hydrogel Photocuring High biocompatibility, easy Relatively weak mechanical
degradation properties
Zhou et al. (2017) [2] Synthetic polymer Hydroxyapatite Inkjet printing High bioactivity, promotes Higher cost, slower printing
bone regeneration speed
Sherman et al.(2023) [3] Synthetic Polymer Poly(lactic Extrusion Strong tunability, high print- Lower durability, uncon-
acid-co-glycolic Printing ing precision trolled degradation rate
acid)
Masuo et al. (2021) [4] Natural Polymer Collagen Inkjet Printing Good biocompatibility, Slower printing speed, lim-
excellent bioactivity ited mechanical properties
Thummuri et al. (2022) [5] Metals Titanium alloy Electron beam High strength, excellent Higher equipment cost,
melting corrosion resistance complex printing process
Garcia et al. (2018) [6] Synthetic polymer Gelatin Photocuring High biocompatibility, Lower mechanical
suitable for tissue engineer- properties, limited shaping
ing and drug delivery precision
Yu et al. (2022) [7] Synthetic polymer β-tricalcium Inkjet printing Good biocompatibility, pro- Limited mechanical
phosphate motes bone regeneration properties, limited precision
Yang et al. (2021) [8] Synthetic polymer Porous Hydroxy- Photocuring Good biocompatibility, Poor control, unstable
apatite promotes bone tissue regen- degradation rate
eration
Capula et al. (2022) [9] Synthetic Polymer Poly(lactic Inkjet printing Strong tunability, high print- Difficult to control
acid-co-caprolac- ing precision degradation rate, slower
tone) printing speed
Sarkar et al. (2009) [10] Natural polymer Gelatin Extrusion Good biocompatibility, good Relatively lower shap-
printing formability and tunability ing precision, limited
mechanical properties
Meng et al. (2020) [11] Metals Titanium alloy Laser melting High strength, excellent Higher equipment cost,
corrosion resistance slower printing speed
Grasso et al. (2017) [14] Synthetic polymer Gelatin Inkjet printing Good biocompatibility, Limited shaping precision,
suitable for various tissue poor mechanical properties
engineering applications
Hennig et al. (2022) [16] Synthetic polymer Poly(lactic Extrusion Strong tunability, promotes Unstable degradation rate,
acid)-hydroxyapa- printing bone regeneration relatively higher printing
tite composite cost
Halbrook et al. (2019) [17] Natural polymer Collagen Photocuring Good biocompatibility, Slower printing speed, lim-
excellent bioactivity ited shaping precision
Grattarola et al. (2021) [18] Metals Titanium alloy Electron beam High strength, excellent Higher manufacturing cost,
melting corrosion resistance slower printing speed
Gautam et al. (2022) [19] Synthetic polymer Gelatin Inkjet printing High biocompatibility, suit- Limited shaping precision,
able for tissue engineering poor mechanical properties
and drug delivery
Ning et al. (2019) [20] Synthetic polymer β-tricalcium Inkjet printing Good biocompatibility, pro- Limited precision, slower
phosphate motes bone regeneration printing speed
Wang et al. (2018) [21] Synthetic Polymer Polylactic Acid Extrusion Good biocompatibility, easy Poor mechanical properties,
Printing degradation unstable degradation rate

similar to inkjet printers. The technique is praised for By adjusting the nozzle diameter, the number of nozzles,
35
advantages, such as high throughput, high speed, and low and the printing speed, finer cell injection can be achieved,
cost, and is suitable for the preparation of pancreatic islets and the construction accuracy can be improved. Secondly,
and in vitro tumor models. The first step in the process of the formulation of bioink should be improved to ensure
36
inkjet bioprinting is to optimize the design of the nozzle. the stable survival and growth of cells, while improving

Volume 10 Issue 1 (2024) 127 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijb.1256