Literature DB >> 24192056

The first systematic analysis of 3D rapid prototyped poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds manufactured through BioCell printing: the effect of pore size and geometry on compressive mechanical behaviour and in vitro hMSC viability.

M Domingos1, F Intranuovo, T Russo, R De Santis, A Gloria, L Ambrosio, J Ciurana, P Bartolo.   

Abstract

Novel additive manufacturing processes are increasingly recognized as ideal techniques to produce 3D biodegradable structures with optimal pore size and spatial distribution, providing an adequate mechanical support for tissue regeneration while shaping in-growing tissues. With regard to the mechanical and biological performances of 3D scaffolds, pore size and geometry play a crucial role. In this study, a novel integrated automated system for the production and in vitro culture of 3D constructs, known as BioCell Printing, was used only to manufacture poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds for tissue engineering; the influence of pore size and shape on their mechanical and biological performances was investigated. Imposing a single lay-down pattern of 0°/90° and varying the filament distance, it was possible to produce scaffolds with square interconnected pores with channel sizes falling in the range of 245-433 µm, porosity 49-57% and a constant road width. Three different lay-down patterns were also adopted (0°/90°, 0°/60/120° and 0°/45°/90°/135°), thus resulting in scaffolds with quadrangular, triangular and complex internal geometries, respectively. Mechanical compression tests revealed a decrease of scaffold stiffness with the increasing porosity and number of deposition angles (from 0°/90° to 0°/45°/90°/135°). Results from biological analysis, carried out using human mesenchymal stem cells, suggest a strong influence of pore size and geometry on cell viability. On the other hand, after 21 days of in vitro static culture, it was not possible to detect any significant variation in terms of cell morphology promoted by scaffold topology. As a first systematic analysis, the obtained results clearly demonstrate the potential of the BioCell Printing process to produce 3D scaffolds with reproducible well organized architectures and tailored mechanical properties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24192056     DOI: 10.1088/1758-5082/5/4/045004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biofabrication        ISSN: 1758-5082            Impact factor:   9.954


  23 in total

Review 1.  Progress in three-dimensional printing with growth factors.

Authors:  Gerry L Koons; Antonios G Mikos
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 9.776

2.  3D Printed Neural Regeneration Devices.

Authors:  Daeha Joung; Nicolas S Lavoie; Shuang-Zhuang Guo; Sung Hyun Park; Ann M Parr; Michael C McAlpine
Journal:  Adv Funct Mater       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 18.808

3.  Design, construction and mechanical testing of digital 3D anatomical data-based PCL-HA bone tissue engineering scaffold.

Authors:  Qingqiang Yao; Bo Wei; Yang Guo; Chengzhe Jin; Xiaotao Du; Chao Yan; Junwei Yan; Wenhao Hu; Yan Xu; Zhi Zhou; Yijin Wang; Liming Wang
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2015-01-18       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  Fabrication of Polycaprolactone/Nano Hydroxyapatite (PCL/nHA) 3D Scaffold with Enhanced In Vitro Cell Response via Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM).

Authors:  Yong Sang Cho; So-Jung Gwak; Young-Sam Cho
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-25       Impact factor: 4.329

Review 5.  Recent advances in bioprinting techniques: approaches, applications and future prospects.

Authors:  Jipeng Li; Mingjiao Chen; Xianqun Fan; Huifang Zhou
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 5.531

6.  Virtual surgical planning and 3D printing in prosthetic orbital reconstruction with percutaneous implants: a technical case report.

Authors:  Yu-Hui Huang; Rosemary Seelaus; Linping Zhao; Pravin K Patel; Mimis Cohen
Journal:  Int Med Case Rep J       Date:  2016-10-31

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging-three-dimensional printing technology fabricates customized scaffolds for brain tissue engineering.

Authors:  Feng Fu; Zhe Qin; Chao Xu; Xu-Yi Chen; Rui-Xin Li; Li-Na Wang; Ding-Wei Peng; Hong-Tao Sun; Yue Tu; Chong Chen; Sai Zhang; Ming-Liang Zhao; Xiao-Hong Li
Journal:  Neural Regen Res       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 5.135

Review 8.  Bone regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, and future directions.

Authors:  Ahmad Oryan; Soodeh Alidadi; Ali Moshiri; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 9.  From intricate to integrated: Biofabrication of articulating joints.

Authors:  Wilhelmina Margaretha Groen; Paweena Diloksumpan; Paul René van Weeren; Riccardo Levato; Jos Malda
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 3.494

10.  Influence of Geometry and Architecture on the In Vivo Success of 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Spinal Fusion.

Authors:  Mitchell Hallman; J Adam Driscoll; Ryan Lubbe; Soyeon Jeong; Kevin Chang; Meraaj Haleem; Adam Jakus; Richard Pahapill; Chawon Yun; Ramille Shah; Wellington K Hsu; Stuart R Stock; Erin L Hsu
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 3.845

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.