Page 181 - IJB-8-4

Ghosh and Yi
Table 1. A review of bioprinting techniques.
Common Cell Speed Cell Resolution Viscosity Structural Scalability Cost
bioprinting viability density integrity
methodologies
Inkjet ~80% Fast Low 50 µm <10 mPa s Low Low Low
Extrusion >90% Slow High 100 µm 30 – 6×10 High Low Low-
7
mPa s -medium medium
Laser-Assisted <85% Medium Medium 10 µm Viscosity 1 Low Low High
Bioprinting – 300 mPa s
The table is reproduced from Kryou et al. [36]

Figure 1. Desired features of bioinks.

A variety of materials and combinations of structurally insufficient, unstable, or inconsistent, which
materials can be utilized as bioink, but among them, the can lead to printing difficulties, flimsy tissue architecture,
most popular and promising are hydrogels (water-based and insufficient structural support for cells [3,6,14] .On the
gels), which are biocompatible and have an extracellular other hand, hydrogels made with synthetic biomaterials,
1
matrix (ECM)-like qualities [10-12] . Hydrogels are the conversely, are more structurally manageable and have
most commonly utilized biomaterials in 3D bioprinting the potential to photocrosslink; however, they can also
on account of their modifiable chemical structures, be more cytotoxic than natural materials, and capable of
biodegradable qualities, ability to hold live cells, generating environments that may not be suitable for cell
customizable mechanical features, and ability to generate survival . Synthetic crosslinking agents, for example,
[15]
acceptable resolution during printing . Hydrogels are can cause injury to cells, which can be avoided by
[3]
natural biomaterials, synthetic biomaterials materials, employing natural crosslinkers .
[16]
or a combination of the two that exploits the benefits of In 3D printing, a variety of biomaterials have been
both . Bioink hydrogels made with natural biomaterials described as bioinks. We can classify these biomaterials
[13]
promote cell development by mimicking the natural ECM, into natural and synthetic biomaterials, respectively.
self-assembling, and enabling biocompatibility; however, Over the past two decades, bioprinting has become
within the in vivo atmosphere, natural hydrogels may be an increasingly economically viable and accessible
technology in tissue engineering research, biomedicine,
1 The extracellular matrix (ECM) in 3D bioprinting, is a non-cellular and organ printing . However, application of bioprinting
[17]
framework produced by cells throughout the body. It supports living
cells and provides biomechanical and biochemical cued for a variety of is uncommon, and the technology related to plant-related
biological processes, such as cell proliferation and differentiation. printing remains in its infancy. Several recent studies were
International Journal of Bioprinting (2022)–Volume 8, Issue 4 173