Page 138 - IJB-10-4
P. 138

International Journal of Bioprinting                                 3D printing innovations against infection




            3D-printed scaffold manufacturing technology has led   copper, zinc oxide, titanium dioxide, or copper oxide) can
            to tremendous advances in  the treatment of orthopedic   be continuously released from the scaffold equipped with
            infection,  exhibiting  increased  diversity  and  widespread   antibacterial activity to address drug resistance  (Figure 4B).
                                                                                                  101
            application. 96,97  These  antimicrobial  modifications  (iii) Coatings on 3D-printed scaffolds: bioactive metal
            predominantly include the following methods: (i) Drug   ions and antimicrobial coating 3D-printed scaffolds can
            loading into 3D-printed scaffolds : 3D printing is used to   simultaneously fight against bone infection and treat
                                      98
            fabricate implants incorporated with antimicrobial agents   osteomyelitis by improving the microenvironment of the
            to mitigate infection risks,  a promising avenue for treating   infected bone defect, rapidly inhibiting the reproduction
                                99
            implant infections (Figure 4A).  (ii) Incorporating   of pathogenic bacteria, and preventing the inflammatory
                                        100
            antimicrobial nanoparticles into 3D-printed scaffolds:   response  in the early stage  of infection  (Figure 4C).
                                                                                                102
            antimicrobial nanoparticles (e.g., silver, gold, selenium,   (iv) Cell-based therapies: the 3D porous scaffold can be
















































            Figure 4. Innovation of 3D-bioprinted scaffolds for removal of orthopedic infections. (A) Antimicrobial drug loading into 3D-printed scaffolds refers to
            one of the most used and simplest fabrication methods for bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Reproduced with permission from ref. . (B) Incorporating
                                                                                                98
            antimicrobial nanoparticles into 3D-printed scaffolds is a viable strategy to combat bone infections. Reproduced with permission from ref. . (C) Combined
                                                                                                  101
            with anti-infective drugs, bioactive metal ions and antimicrobial coating 3D-printed scaffolds can simultaneously fight against bone infection and treat
            osteomyelitis by improving the microenvironment of the infected bone defect, rapidly inhibiting the reproduction of pathogenic bacteria, and preventing the
            inflammatory response in the early stage of infection. Reproduced with permission from ref. . Copyright © 2020 ACS. (D) To promote bone regeneration
                                                                      102
            while preventing infection, the 3D porous scaffold can be loaded with specific cells during the 3D printing process. Reproduced with permission from
            ref. . (E) Physical stimulation (e.g., magnetic field, electric field, and infrared light) can be loaded to promote bone tissue growth while resisting infection,
              103
            effectively treating bone defects. Reproduced with permission from ref. . (F) Growth factors (e.g., VEGF, FGF, and PVDF) can be incorporated into the
                                                         104
            3D-printed scaffolds to promote the construction of vessels in bone defects while resisting infection. Reproduced with permission from ref. .
                                                                                                    100
            Volume 10 Issue 4 (2024)                       130                                doi: 10.36922/ijb.2338
   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143