Page 43 - IJB-6-1
P. 43
Zhang, et al.
by shear stress, which is induced by cell-cell and Engineering International Scholarship Program,
cell-material interactions during the printing and US National Science Foundation Award
process. #1762202.
Third, there is a difference between the scaffold
CAD model and SBE 3D printed scaffold after References
drying due to the solvent-based process; these
variations also affect scaffold reproducibility. 1. Gross BV, Erkal JL, 2014, Evaluation of 3d Printing and
its Potential Impact on Biotechnology and the Chemical
These differences can lead to unexpected Sciences. Anal. Chem., 86:3240–53.
variations affecting mechanical stimuli and
cellular responses . Micro-CT technology can be 2. Do AV, Khorsand B, Geary SM, et al., 2015, 3D Printing of
[68]
used to evaluate the scaffold pore size, porosity, Scaffolds for Tissue Regeneration Applications. Adv Healthc
and interconnectivity. Computational modeling Mater, 4(12):1742–62. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.201500168.
is a cost-effective method, which can predict 3. Wüst S, Müller R, Hofmann S, 2011, Controlled Positioning
of Cells in Biomaterials Approaches towards 3D Tissue
the mechanical stimuli that are detected by cells
under in vitro or in vivo settings. Computational Printing. J Funct Biomater, 2(3):119–54. DOI: 10.3390/
modeling methods and biological experiments jfb2030119.
can be used together to better understand the 4. Gloria A, Russo T, De Santis R, et al., 2009, 3D Fiber
correlations among scaffold design, mechanical Deposition Technique to Make Multifunctional and Tailor-
stimuli, and tissue regeneration performance [69,70] . made Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications. J Appl
The SBE 3D printing process begins with Biomater Biomech, 7(3):141–52.
scaffold design, followed by biomaterial/cell ink 5. Malda J, Woodfield TB, van der Vloodt F, et al., 2005,
formulation, scaffold manufacturing, scaffold The Effect of PEGT/PBT Scaffold Architecture on the
culture, and implantation. The use of SBE 3D Composition of Tissue Engineered Cartilage. Biomaterials,
printing technologies for scaffold fabrication with or 26(1):63–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.02.046.
without cells remains fraught with many challenges. 6. Melchels FP, Tonnarelli B, Olivares AL, et al., 2011, The
The ink biomaterials, ink rheology, processing Influence of the Scaffold Design on the Distribution of
parameters, and cross-linking mechanism affect the Adhering Cells After Perfusion Cell Seeding. Biomaterials,
results of SBE 3D printing. Although encouraging 32(11):2878–84. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.023.
results have been obtained from SBE 3D printing, 7. Phillippi JA, Miller E, Weiss L, et al., 2008, Microenvironments
challenges remain concerning the properties of Engineered by Inkjet Bioprinting Spatially Direct Adult Stem
current biomaterials, incorporation of multiple Cells Toward Muscle-and Bone-like Subpopulations. Stem
materials and cells, and poor reproducibility Cells, 26(1):127–34. DOI: 10.1634/stemcells.2007-0520.
of the 3D printed scaffolds. Addressing these 8. Woodfield T, Van Blitterswijk CA, De Wijn J, et al., 2005,
challenges will facilitate clinical translation and Polymer Scaffolds Fabricated with Pore-size Gradients as a
commercialization of SBE 3D printing. Model for Studying the Zonal Organization within Tissue-
engineered Cartilage Constructs. Tissue Eng, 11(9-10):1297–
Conflicts of interest 311. DOI: 10.1089/ten.2005.11.1297.
9. Gao, F., Xu Z, Liang Q, et al., 2018, Direct 3D Printing of
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of High Strength Biohybrid Gradient Hydrogel Scaffolds for
interest. Efficient Repair of Osteochondral Defect. Adv Funct Mater,
Acknowledgments 28(13):1706644. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201706644.
10. Trachtenberg JE, Placone JK, Smith BT, et al., 2017, Extrusion-
This work was supported by a grant of the Ministry based 3D Printing of Poly (Propylene Fumarate) Scaffolds
of Research and Innovation, CNCS – UEFISCDI, with Hydroxyapatite Gradients. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed,
Project Number PNIII-P4-ID-PCE-2016-0884 28(6):532–54. DOI: 10.1080/09205063.2017.1286184.
within PNCDI III, the Charles M. Vest National 11. Hockaday L, Kang KH, Colangelo NW, et al., 2012, Rapid
Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges for 3D Printing of Anatomically Accurate and Mechanically
International Journal of Bioprinting (2020)–Volume 6, Issue 1 39
