Page 15 - IJB-2-1
P. 15

Nazia Mehrban, Gui Zhen Teoh and Martin Anthony Birchall

            even more complexity to an already modified system.     The main issue in using this approach is matching
                                                               the printable properties of the separate materials or
            4.2 Natural Materials                              selecting a bioprinting technique which would allow

            In contrast, natural  materials, although inferior to   both materials to be printed simultaneously under dif-
            synthetic hydrogels  in terms  of  controlling  gelation   ferent conditions.  Although the latter adds another
            kinetics and  mechanical strength, are able to  chemi-  level of complexity to printing 3D  biocompatible
            cally and physically mimic native extracellular matrix   scaffolds, it is a branch of bioprinting that is currently
            (ECM). Collagen is the most abundant component of   being explored [86] .
            ECM  [73] . It is widely used in tissue engineering appli-  5. Cell Encapsulation in Hydrogels for Printa-
            cations and contains cell-guiding chemical cues, such
            as the cell adhesion peptide sequence arginine-glycine-   ble Bioinks
            aspartic acid (RGD) [74] . However, although it is wide-  The choice of cells for 3D bioprinting is often based
            ly used  as a bioprinting  material,  collagen  is an  un-  on the type of tissue being created. However, as tis-
            likely gold-standard candidate as it contracts and does   sues and organs are composed of multiple cell types
            not retain its original shape.                     which  have a range of specific functions, it is likely
               Hyaluronic acid  (HA), is also  a naturally derived   that the bioprinting requirement will be for a mixture
            material which  does  retain  its shape  and  is already   of cells. Current methods predominantly involve
            used clinically [75] . HA forms very soft gels but can be   printing individual cell types in specific patterns, de-
            modified and crosslinked using a variety of methods   signed to mimic native tissue cell distribution [87] . Al-
            including the UV method described in Section 4.1 [76]    though cells have been printed in single drops, with
            and thiol-modified HA using gold nanoparticles [77]  to   each drop containing one or two cells [88] , it is currently
            increase its stiffness. Similarly, fibrin is already used   not possible to print individual cells reliably. This is
            in surgery as a haemostatic agent and sealant [78,79] . The   not an issue as long as large cell agglomerates (clus-
            added  complexity  with  fibrin  is that  it crosslinks   ters of cells large enough  to  cause cell death  at the
            through the addition of thrombin. However, it can   centre of the cell mass) can be avoided and cell-to-cell
            produce  mechanically  stable hydrogels and  has been   contact can  be  maintained. The size of  these agglo-
            blended with other gels for bioprinting purposes [80] .     merates will depend on the type of cells used and the
               Some natural gels are difficult to print, not because   ease with which nutrient and waste exchange can oc-
            they form soft gels as described in the earlier exam-  cur at the centre of the mass.
            ples, but because their gelation properties are unde-  For a more efficient system, resembling a native 3D
            sirable. Gelatin  is one such  material. It forms a gel   environment, a material-cell composite ink would be
            easily by temperature control but has a melting tem-  more suitable. The ability to encapsulate cells within
            perature of 30–35°C [81] , which is below the standard   the material as it is being printed allows researchers to
            physiological temperature of 37°C. Similarly, alginate   create a more tissue-like environment compared with
            produces gels easily through  cation crosslinking, but   creating a 2D construct first onto which cells are then
            unless it is modified with motifs that can guide cells to   seeded [89] .  With hydrogels this has been attempted
            adhere, proliferate and  differentiate,  it is  relatively   with  some success [90] , creating  cell-laden constructs
            inert [82] .                                       that contain microvascular networks [91]  and are able to
            4.3 Hybrid Materials                               integrate  well with  native tissue [22] . Combining cells
                                                               with  hydrogels is a delicate balance of maintaining
            An alternative  approach to producing scaffolds with   high cell viability  whilst ensuring that there are not
            desirable properties is to create a hybrid. A study on   too  many  cells in the gel to cause hyperplasia  or
            methacrylated hyaluronic acid combined with metha-  apoptosis,  either  by  optimising  the  number  of cells
            crylated gelatin showed that not only could cell viabil-  added at the loading stage of the process or by con-
            ity be maintained but by varying the concentrations of   trolling the rate of cell proliferation post-printing [13] .
            the two  materials, the stiffness and viscosity of the   When using hydrogels with cells, there are a num-
            hybrid could be controlled [83] . Other researchers have   ber of factors which could cause cell death. One of the
            used a similar approach to bioprint scaffolds for a   most obvious causes is the method selected for gela-
            range of uses, including cartilage engineering [84]   and   tion. During  crosslinking or temperature-based gela-
            to tune material properties for a range of scaffolds [85] .     tion the cell viability could be substantially affected [92] .

                                        International Journal of Bioprinting (2016)–Volume 2, Issue 1      11
   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20