bims-biprem Biomed News
on Bioprinting for regenerative medicine
Issue of 2023–11–26
seven papers selected by
Seerat Maqsood, University of Teramo
  1. A review on the recent applications of synthetic biopolymers in 3D printing for biomedical applications.
  2. Biopolymers for Tissue Engineering: Crosslinking, Printing Techniques, and Applications.
  3. Towards Polycaprolactone-Based Scaffolds for Alveolar Bone Tissue Engineering: A Biomimetic Approach in a 3D Printing Technique.
  4. Recent Progress of In Vitro 3D Culture of Male Germ Stem Cells.
  5. 3D Printing Applications for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction: A Sweeping Review.
  6. The Creation of an Average 3D Model of the Human Cartilaginous Nasal Septum and Its Biomimetic Applications.
  7. Porous Three-Dimensional Polyurethane Scaffolds Promote Scar-Free Endogenous Regeneration After Acute Brain Hemorrhage.
  1. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2023 Nov 20. 34(12): 62
    A review on the recent applications of synthetic biopolymers in 3D printing for biomedical applications.
    Shiva S, Asuwin Prabu R G, Gauri Bajaj, Amy Elsa John, Sharan Chandran, Vishnu Vijay Kumar, Seeram Ramakrishna.
      3D printing technology is an emerging method that gained extensive attention from researchers worldwide, especially in the health and medical fields. Biopolymers are an emerging class of materials offering excellent properties and flexibility for additive manufacturing. Biopolymers are widely used in biomedical applications in biosensing, immunotherapy, drug delivery, tissue engineering and regeneration, implants, and medical devices. Various biodegradable and non-biodegradable polymeric materials are considered as bio-ink for 3d printing. Here, we offer an extensive literature review on the current applications of synthetic biopolymers in the field of 3D printing. A trend in the publication of biopolymers in the last 10 years are focused on the review by analyzing more than 100 publications. Their application and classification based on biodegradability are discussed. The various studies, along with their practical applications, are elaborated in the subsequent sections for polyethylene, polypropylene, polycaprolactone, polylactide, etc. for biomedical applications. The disadvantages of various biopolymers are discussed, and future perspectives like combating biocompatibility problems using 3D printed biomaterials to build compatible prosthetics are also discussed and the potential application of using resin with the combination of biopolymers to build customized implants, personalized drug delivery systems and organ on a chip technologies are expected to open a new set of chances for the development of healthcare and regenerative medicine in the future.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-023-06765-9
  2. Gels. 2023 Nov 10. pii: 890. [Epub ahead of print]9(11):
    Biopolymers for Tissue Engineering: Crosslinking, Printing Techniques, and Applications.
    David Patrocinio, Victor Galván-Chacón, J Carlos Gómez-Blanco, Sonia P Miguel, Jorge Loureiro, Maximiano P Ribeiro, Paula Coutinho, J Blas Pagador, Francisco M Sanchez-Margallo.
      Currently, tissue engineering has been dedicated to the development of 3D structures through bioprinting techniques that aim to obtain personalized, dynamic, and complex hydrogel 3D structures. Among the different materials used for the fabrication of such structures, proteins and polysaccharides are the main biological compounds (biopolymers) selected for the bioink formulation. These biomaterials obtained from natural sources are commonly compatible with tissues and cells (biocompatibility), friendly with biological digestion processes (biodegradability), and provide specific macromolecular structural and mechanical properties (biomimicry). However, the rheological behaviors of these natural-based bioinks constitute the main challenge of the cell-laden printing process (bioprinting). For this reason, bioprinting usually requires chemical modifications and/or inter-macromolecular crosslinking. In this sense, a comprehensive analysis describing these biopolymers (natural proteins and polysaccharides)-based bioinks, their modifications, and their stimuli-responsive nature is performed. This manuscript is organized into three sections: (1) tissue engineering application, (2) crosslinking, and (3) bioprinting techniques, analyzing the current challenges and strengths of biopolymers in bioprinting. In conclusion, all hydrogels try to resemble extracellular matrix properties for bioprinted structures while maintaining good printability and stability during the printing process.
    Keywords:  bioprinting techniques; crosslinking; hydrogels; natural polymers; tissue engineering
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/gels9110890
  3. Int J Mol Sci. 2023 Nov 10. pii: 16180. [Epub ahead of print]24(22):
    Towards Polycaprolactone-Based Scaffolds for Alveolar Bone Tissue Engineering: A Biomimetic Approach in a 3D Printing Technique.
    Krzysztof Stafin, Paweł Śliwa, Marek Piątkowski.
      The alveolar bone is a unique type of bone, and the goal of bone tissue engineering (BTE) is to develop methods to facilitate its regeneration. Currently, an emerging trend involves the fabrication of polycaprolactone (PCL)-based scaffolds using a three-dimensional (3D) printing technique to enhance an osteoconductive architecture. These scaffolds are further modified with hydroxyapatite (HA), type I collagen (CGI), or chitosan (CS) to impart high osteoinductive potential. In conjunction with cell therapy, these scaffolds may serve as an appealing alternative to bone autografts. This review discusses research gaps in the designing of 3D-printed PCL-based scaffolds from a biomimetic perspective. The article begins with a systematic analysis of biological mineralisation (biomineralisation) and ossification to optimise the scaffold's structural, mechanical, degradation, and surface properties. This scaffold-designing strategy lays the groundwork for developing a research pathway that spans fundamental principles such as molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and fabrication techniques. Ultimately, this paves the way for systematic in vitro and in vivo studies, leading to potential clinical applications.
    Keywords:  3D-printed PCL-based scaffold; alveolar bone; biomimetic ossification; biomineralisation; bone tissue engineering; chitosan; collagen; fused filament fabrication; hydroxyapatite
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242216180
  4. J Funct Biomater. 2023 Nov 08. pii: 543. [Epub ahead of print]14(11):
    Recent Progress of In Vitro 3D Culture of Male Germ Stem Cells.
    Jiang Wu, Kai Kang, Siqi Liu, Yaodan Ma, Meng Yu, Xin Zhao.
      Male germline stem cells (mGSCs), also known as spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs), are the fundamental seed cells of male animal reproductive physiology. However, environmental influences, drugs, and harmful substances often pose challenges to SSCs, such as population reduction and quality decline. With advancements in bioengineering technology and biomaterial technology, an increasing number of novel cell culture methods and techniques have been employed for studying the proliferation and differentiation of SSCs in vitro. This paper provides a review on recent progress in 3D culture techniques for SSCs in vitro; we summarize the microenvironment of SSCs and spermatocyte development, with a focus on scaffold-based culture methods and 3D printing cell culture techniques for SSCs. Additionally, decellularized testicular matrix (DTM) and other biological substrates are utilized through various combinations and approaches to construct an in vitro culture microenvironment suitable for SSC growth. Finally, we present some perspectives on current research trends and potential opportunities within three areas: the 3D printing niche environment, alternative options to DTM utilization, and advancement of the in vitro SSC culture technology system.
    Keywords:  3D culture system; biomaterial; in vitro culture; male germline stem cells; niche microenvironment
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb14110543
  5. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2023 Nov 20.
    3D Printing Applications for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction: A Sweeping Review.
    Blaire V Slavin, Quinn T Ehlen, Joseph P Costello, Vasudev Vivekanand Nayak, Estavam A Bonfante, Ernesto B Benalcázar Jalkh, Christopher M Runyan, Lukasz Witek, Paulo G Coelho.
      The field of craniomaxillofacial (CMF) surgery is rich in pathological diversity and broad in the ages that it treats. Moreover, the CMF skeleton is a complex confluence of sensory organs and hard and soft tissue with load-bearing demands that can change within millimeters. Computer-aided design (CAD) and additive manufacturing (AM) create extraordinary opportunities to repair the infinite array of craniomaxillofacial defects that exist because of the aforementioned circumstances. 3D printed scaffolds have the potential to serve as a comparable if not superior alternative to the "gold standard" autologous graft. In vitro and in vivo studies continue to investigate the optimal 3D printed scaffold design and composition to foster bone regeneration that is suited to the unique biological and mechanical environment of each CMF defect. Furthermore, 3D printed fixation devices serve as a patient-specific alternative to those that are available off-the-shelf with an opportunity to reduce operative time and optimize fit. Similar benefits have been found to apply to 3D printed anatomical models and surgical guides for preoperative or intraoperative use. Creation and implementation of these devices requires extensive preclinical and clinical research, novel manufacturing capabilities, and strict regulatory oversight. Researchers, manufacturers, CMF surgeons, and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are working in tandem to further the development of such technology within their respective domains, all with a mutual goal to deliver safe, effective, cost-efficient, and patient-specific CMF care. This manuscript reviews FDA regulatory status, 3D printing techniques, biomaterials, and sterilization procedures suitable for 3D printed devices of the craniomaxillofacial skeleton. It also seeks to discuss recent clinical applications, economic feasibility, and future directions of this novel technology. By reviewing the current state of 3D printing in CMF surgery, we hope to gain a better understanding of its impact and in turn identify opportunities to further the development of patient-specific surgical care.
    Keywords:  3D printed medical devices; FDA regulation; additive manufacturing; biomaterials; bone regeneration; craniomaxillofacial surgery
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.3c01171
  6. Biomimetics (Basel). 2023 Nov 06. pii: 530. [Epub ahead of print]8(7):
    The Creation of an Average 3D Model of the Human Cartilaginous Nasal Septum and Its Biomimetic Applications.
    Peter S Han, Nihal Punjabi, Mickey Goese, Jared C Inman.
      The cartilaginous nasal septum is integral to the overall structure of the nose. Developing our an-atomic understanding of the septum will improve the planning and techniques of septal surgeries. While the basic dimensions of the septum have previously been described, the average shape in the sagittal plane has yet to be established. Furthermore, determining the average shape allows for the creation of a mean three-dimensional (3D) septum model. To better understand the average septal shape, we dissected septums from 40 fresh human cadavers. Thickness was measured across pre-defined points on each specimen. Image processing in Photoshop was used to superimpose lateral photographs of the septums to determine the average shape. The average shape was then combined with thickness data to develop a 3D model. This model may be utilized in finite elemental analyses, creating theoretical results about septal properties that are more translatable to real-world clinical practice. Our 3D septum also has numerous applications for 3D printing. Realistic models can be created for educational or surgical planning purposes. In the future, our model could also serve as the basis for 3D-printed scaffolds to aid in tissue regeneration to reconstruct septal defects. The model can be viewed at the NIH 3D model repository (3DPX ID: 020598, Title: 3D Nasal Septum).
    Keywords:  3D printing; anatomic shape; finite elemental analysis; nasal septum; septoplasty
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics8070530
  7. Transl Stroke Res. 2023 Nov 23.
    Porous Three-Dimensional Polyurethane Scaffolds Promote Scar-Free Endogenous Regeneration After Acute Brain Hemorrhage.
    Qiao Zhang, Jinlin Chen, Jingjing Lin, Ruichao Liang, Min He, Yanchao Wang, Hong Tan.
      Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the most lethal subtype of stroke and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in the clinical treatment of ICH, limited progress has been made regarding endogenous brain regeneration after ICH. Failure of brain regeneration is mainly attributed to the inhibitive regenerative microenvironment caused by secondary injury after ICH. In this study, we investigated a three-dimensional biodegradable waterborne polyurethane (BWPU) scaffold as a tool to promote brain regeneration after ICH. After implantation into the cavity following hematoma evacuation, these implanted scaffolds could act as a reservoir; store a series of necrotic debris, cytokines, and chemokines; and attract microglia/macrophages to their pores. Subsequently, these microglia/macrophages were polarized into the M1-like subtype to eliminate these substances. This process disperses M1-like immune cells and prevents the formation of dense glial scar-free structures after ICH. Inflammatory cells in scaffolds include scar-free secreted growth factors and extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins, and further induce a M2-like immune cells enriched regeneration-predominant microenvironment to promote endogenous brain regeneration with functional recovery. In summary, in this work, we have revealed the potential and mechanism of the BWPU scaffold as a tool to promote endogenous brain tissue regeneration after ICH.
    Keywords:  Brain hemorrhage; Brain regeneration; Polyurethane; Stroke; Tissue engineering scaffold
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12975-023-01212-x
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:12.