Page 192 - IJB-8-2

Error Correction for Bioprinting
vision technology was applied to helix bioprinting to Organoid Reproducibility and Conformation. Nat Mater,
achieve process control. The average error of the three 20:260–71.
helixes has been reduced from 1.06 mm, 1.15 mm, and https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-020-00853-9
1.58 mm to 0.36 mm, 0.25 mm, and 0.48mm, respectively. 2. Cui X, Breitenkamp K, Finn MG, et al., 2012, Direct Human
For the high error area of each helix, the average error Cartilage Repair Using Three-Dimensional Bioprinting
has been reduced from 2.33 mm, 2.34 mm, and 2.15 mm
to 0.21 mm, 0.19 mm, and 0.25mm, respectively, and Technology. Tissue Eng A, 18:1304–12.
the correction efficiency has reached 91%, 92%, and https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tea.2011.0543
87%, respectively. The resolution of bioprinting shows 3. Yanez M, Rincon J, Dones A, et al., 2015, In Vivo Assessment
a great improvement, it should be noted that only the of Printed Microvasculature in a Bilayer Skin Graft to Treat
reference trajectory is modified. More intuitively, the Full-Thickness Wounds. Tissue Eng A, 21:224–33.
error is significantly reduced compared with the original https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tea.2013.0561
helix printing trajectory after correction and shows high
repeatability. 4. Lee A, Hudson AR, Shiwarski DJ, et al., 2019, 3D Bioprinting
This study, for the 1 time, proposes the use of a of Collagen to Rebuild Components of the Human Heart.
st
computer vision technology in bioprinting procedure to Science, 365:482–7.
reduce the deviation values of the printing helix trajectory https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav9051
compared to the reference trajectory through process 5. Daly AC, Prendergast ME, Hughes AJ, et al., 2021,
control. This method is applicable to the printing of other Bioprinting for the Biologist. Cell, 184:18–32.
organs, in addition to the human ear, so as to reduce
printing errors. Through this procedure, the bioprinting https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.12.002
resolution can be further increased and the printing 6. Jose RR, Rodriguez MJ, Dixon TA, et al., 2016, Evolution
accuracy can be improved, thereby improving the areas of Bioinks and Additive Manufacturing Technologies for 3D
of organ manufacturing and tissue engineering. Bioprinting. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2:1662–78.

Acknowledgments https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00088
7. Murphy SV, Atala A, 2014, 3D Bioprinting of Tissues and
Guangxi Science and Technology Program: The central Organs. Nat Biotechnol, 32:773–85.
government guides the local science and technology https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2958
development science and technology innovation base
project (Guike Jizi[2020] No.198): Basic Research and 8. Zorlutuna P, Jeong JH, Kong H, et al., 2011, Stereolithography-
Transformation Technology Innovation Base of Bone and Based Hydrogel Microenvironments to Examine Cellular
Joint Degenerative Diseases. Interactions. Adv Funct Mater, 21:3642–51.
https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201101023
Funding 9. Darwish LR, El-Wakad MT, Farag MM, 2021, Towards an
The authors thankfully acknowledge the financial support Ultra-Affordable Three-Dimensional Bioprinter: A Heated
listed as below: National Natural Science Foundation Inductive-Enabled Syringe Pump Extrusion Multifunction
of China under (Grant Nos.51831011, 52011530181), Module for Open-Source Fused Deposition Modeling Three-
Shanghai Science and Technology Commission under Dimensional Printers. J Manuf Sci Eng, 143:125001.
Grant No.20S31900100.
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050824
Conflict of interest 10. Duan B, Hockaday LA, Kang KH, et al., 2008, 3D Bioprinting
The authors declare no competing financial interests. of Heterogeneous Aortic Valve Conduits with Alginate/
Gelatin Hydrogels. Bone, 23:1–7.
Authors’ contributions https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.34420.3D
The manuscript was written through contributions of 11. Hinton TJ, Lee A, Feinberg AW, 2017, 3D Bioprinting from
all authors. All authors have given approval to the final the Micrometer to Millimeter Length Scales: Size Does
version of the manuscript. Matter. Curr Opin Biomed Eng, 1:31–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobme.2017.02.004
References
12. Ozbolat IT, Hospodiuk M, 2016, Current Advances and Future
1. Lawlor KT, Vanslambrouck JM, Higgins JW, et al., Perspectives in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting. Biomaterials,
2021, Cellular Extrusion Bioprinting Improves Kidney 76:321–43.

184 International Journal of Bioprinting (2022)–Volume 8, Issue 2