Page 416 - IJB-9-2
P. 416

International Journal of Bioprinting                           Design and 3D printing of TPMS breast scaffolds


            possible while removing the tumor. Nonetheless, cavities   and gelatin methacrylate (GelMA) are two common
            will form in breast tissue after the surgery, resulting in   hydrogels in biomedicine due to their good formability
            morphological and functional deficits of the breast and   and biocompatibility, respectively. For example, Wang
            further leading to post-operative anxiety and psychosocial   et al.  developed a GelMA-PEGDA-nano-hydroxyapatite
                                                                   [30]
            dysfunction in  patients .  Clinically, breast  repair and   composite hydrogel scaffold for bone tissue engineering,
                               [2]
            reconstruction are achieved mainly through fat autograft   and the results showed that the scaffold had good cell
            and allograft. The former causes secondary trauma, while   viability and biocompatibility. Yuan  et al.  fabricated a
                                                                                                 [31]
            the latter faces the disadvantages of donor deficiency,   GelMA/PEGDA  microneedles  patch  loaded  with  human
            immunological rejection, and high cost [3,4] . Although   umbilical vein endothelial cells for wound healing, and this
            prosthesis, such as silicone and saline fillings, exhibit   hydrogel patch exhibited distinctive biological features.
            flexibility and tissue-like elasticity for breast reconstruction,   Numerous  studies [32-35]   have  proven  that  only  when
            they will cause an inflammatory reaction and the risks of   the elastic modulus of breast tissue scaffold matches that
            rapture and leakage, leading to various complications [5-7] .   of native breast tissue (0.002 – 1 MPa) can the scaffold
            Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has emerged   effectively stimulate cell growth and differentiation into
            as an effective way to address the issues due to its ability to   breast tissue. The mechanical properties of breast scaffolds
            fabricate biodegradable breast scaffolds economically [8-10] .
                                                               are affected not only by materials, but also by scaffold
              Fused deposition modeling (FDM), the most        structures. The type of structure unit cell determines
            common 3D printing technology, can rapidly build   the mechanical properties of the breast tissue scaffold,
            complex 3D structures through layer-by-layer deposition   including elastic modulus, stress distribution, and stability.
            of thermoplastic materials [11-14] . Due to its rapidity,   Many unit cells were harnessed to construct breast tissue
            personalized  customization,  flexibility,  and  low  cost,   scaffolds, such as grid , crystal lattice , coil,  and
                                                                                  [36]
                                                                                                 [37]
                                                                                                       [38]
            it  is  widely adopted in  breast  tissue  engineering  for   sinusoidal  unit cells for different purposes. However,
                                                                       [32]
            fabricating geometrically complex scaffolds to better   current breast tissue scaffolds consisted of the unit cells
            mimic the intrinsic complexities of native tissue [2,15,16] .   mentioned above exhibit much higher elastic modulus
            Of many commonly used FDM-printable biomaterials,   than that of native breast tissue. Thus, many studies have
            polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) are   made effort to optimize the elastic modulus of scaffold.
            broadly employed in biomedical fields due to their   Rba et al.  modulated the elastic modulus of PLA lattice
                                                                      [39]
            biodegradability, printability,  and adjustable mechanical   scaffolds by optimizing parameters, such as printing
            properties [17,18] . However, the  degradation process of   temperature, speed, and layer thickness, but the elastic
            PLA scaffolds is accompanied by the production of lactic   modulus of the scaffold is still 942 MPa, much higher
            acid,  leading  to  enhanced  acidity  of  its  surrounding   than that of native tissue. Chhaya et al.  utilized PCL to
                                                                                              [38]
            environment, subsequently, causing tissue inflammation   print coil scaffold, and its elastic modulus was reduced to
            and necrosis at the implantation position [19,20] . PCL, a softer   21.5 MPa, which is also not appropriate for breast tissue.
            biomaterial compared to PLA, is more appropriate for soft-  Although some researchers [32,36]  reduced the elastic modulus
            tissue engineering. For instance, Chhaya et al.  designed   of PCL scaffolds to several MPa through structural design
                                                 [21]
            and fabricated a patient-specific PCL breast scaffold which   and parameter optimization, the fidelity of the fabricated
            was implanted into a minipig and then injected with 4 cm    scaffolds is poor, and the structural instability (fracture or
                                                          3
            of lipoaspirate. After 24 weeks, the area of adipose tissue   tilt) occurred when compressed, which could not provide a
            in this scaffold was similar to that of native breast tissue,   long-term effective environment for breast reconstruction.
            proving the ability of PCL scaffold for breast regeneration.   Recently, the highly-porous PCL breast scaffolds with
            In addition, PCL scaffolds were also widely used in   helical architectures designed by Meng et al.  performed
                                                                                                  [40]
            trachea , bile duct , meniscus,  and auricle  repair   stability with uniform deformation pattern and low elastic
                                       [24]
                                                   [25]
                            [23]
                  [22]
            and reconstruction.                                modulus (below 1 MPa). Nevertheless, the small specific
              Nevertheless, although PCL scaffolds are biocompatible,   surface area of these helical architectures is unfavorable
            cell adhesion ability is poor on these materials because of the   for the cell adhesion, further leading to the difficulty of
            low hydrophilicity , which influences the subsequent cell   tissue formation. A fundamental issue for breast scaffold
                          [26]
            proliferation, differentiation, and new tissue in-growth .   design is how to simultaneously modulate the elastic
                                                        [27]
            A more cell-friendly material is needed to be incorporated   modulus for better stimulating cell differentiation and
            into these scaffolds to improve the cell environment.   maintain structural stability for protecting cells and tissue,
            Hydrogel is a widely used biomaterial that is similar to   and provide large specific surface area for allowing cell
            extracellular matrix and has been widely used in biomedical   adhesion and tissue formation, a significant challenge in
            applications [28,29] . Poly (ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA)   breast reconstruction.

            Volume 9 Issue 2 (2023)                        408                         https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.685
   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421