Page 18 - IJB-4-2

The arrival of commercial bioprinters – Towards 3D bioprinting revolution!

1.2 Market, Research and Patent landscape on International Patent Classification (IPC)] identified
are: tissue engineering (163 PFs), tissue or organ (67),
Bioprinting is a revolutionary tissue engineering (TE) polylactic acid (46) and 3D printer (45). Eight key
strategy that holds immense potential as a manufacturing drivers identified by the experts in the field are: (a) tissue
platform for fabrication of in vitro tissue. A market engineering, (b) 3D bioprinting system, (c) bioinks,
research report by BCC Research pegged the global (d) fibres and scaffolds, (e) human body models, (f)
bioprinting at US$ 263.8 million in 2015. It forecasted regenerative medicine, (g) pharma ceutical research and
the market to reach US$ 295 million in 2016 and shoot (h) vascularization. The linkage between those knowledge
to $1.8 billion by 2021. This growth is calculated at a clusters and the key drivers have been demonstrated. As
compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 43.9% from of now, companies within the bioprinting industry can
2016 to 2021 [10] . Another report valued the global 3D be broadly categorized into three categories–companies
bioprinting market at US$ 682 million in 2016 with selling only commercial systems, companies providing
[11]
significant future increases . It forecasted the market the bioprinted tissue and companies providing bioprinting
to reach US$ 2.6 billion by 2024. The market growth is system as a service.
expected to be driven by new printing technologies as
well as the expansion of new applications beyond the 1.3 common 3D Bioprinting technologies
medical field. However, medical applications (including
toxicity screening, organ transplants) are expected to Almost all the current bioprinters make use of the
[11]
retain the largest growth at 30% . traditional material deposition techniques (extrusion
Bioprinting as a field has been very technology or ink-jet) or modern optics-based/light-based (laser-
intensive. John Hornick and Kai Rajan evaluated the assisted or stereolithography) for printing (Table 1).
3D bioprinting patent landscape and found, as of June 1.3.1 Extrusion Bioprinting
2016, 950 patents and pending applications filed by more
[12]
than a hundred companies . This diverse list included The extrusion-based approach is the most common
both small enterprises and MNCs based in various technology implemented by the majority of commercial
geographical locations, suggesting a strong global interest 3D bioprinters primarily due to cheaper assembly and
and drive. In terms of the patent portfolio, the leaderboard operational costs. The technique facilitates extrusion
was occupied by Organovo followed by Koninklijke of cylindrical filaments of bioink, employing either a
Philips and Wake Forest University respectively. A very pneumatic (air pressure), mechanical (piston) or solenoid
[14]
detailed scientometric and patentometric analyses of the (electrical pulses) control (Figure 2A) . Extrusion-
field of 3D bioprinting was carried out by Rodriguez- based bioprinters enjoy clear advantages such as
Salvador et al. [13] using competitive technology greater deposition and printing speed, but their higher
intelligence methodology. The countries currently leading throughput comes at the expense of lower resolution as
[15]
the patent race are China and USA while Organovo and compared to the other technologies .
Tsinghua University came out as the leading institutions 1.3.2 Inkjet Bioprinting
(Figure 1). The patent analysis from the year Jan 2000 –
July 2016 revealed at least 345 patent families (PFs). The Inkjet bioprinting is a concept directly borrowed from
overall proportion of patent applications–patents granted– the conventional paper printing. The printing setup
inactive patents stood at 70%–17%–13%. Biomaterials includes a reservoir of ink, where an acoustic wave is
and Biofabrication are the most popular scientific journals produced to dispense a polymeric solution through the
for publishing. The four major knowledge clusters [based nozzle (Figure 2B). This acoustic wave can either be

table 1. Comparison of bioprinting approaches
Bioprinting approaches
Parameters
Microextrusion Inkjet Laser-assisted Stereolithography
Material viscosity 30 to > 6 × 10 mPa/s 3.5 – 12 mPa/s 1 – 300 mPa/s No limitation
7
crosslinking strategy Photocuring, thermal, chemical Photocuring, chemical Photocuring, chemical Photocuring, chemical also
cell viability 40% – 80% > 85% > 95% > 85%
cell density High Low Medium Medium
Printing speed Slow Fast Moderate Fast
Printing resolution Medium High High High
cost of printer Medium Low High Low

2 International Journal of Bioprinting (2018)–Volume 4, Issue 2