Literature DB >> 31352105

Optimization of photocrosslinkable resin components and 3D printing process parameters.

Antonio J Guerra1, Jan Lammel-Lindemann2, Alex Katko3, Alex Kleinfehn4, Ciro A Rodriguez2, Luiz H Catalani5, Matthew L Becker4, Joaquim Ciurana6, David Dean7.   

Abstract

The role of 3D printing in the biomedical field is growing. In this context, photocrosslink-based 3D printing procedures for resorbable polymers stand out. Despite much work, more studies are needed on photocuring stereochemistry, new resin additives, new polymers and resin components. As part of these studies it is vital to present the logic used to optimize the amount of each resin constituent and how that effects printing process parameters. The present manuscript aims to analyze the effects of poly(propylene fumarate) (PPF) resin components and their effect on 3D printing process parameters. Diethyl fumarate (DEF), bisacylphosphine oxide (BAPO), Irgacure 784, 2-hydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone (HMB) and, for the first time, in biomedical 3D printing, ethyl acetate (EA), were the resin components under investigation in this study. Regarding printing process parameters, Exposure Time, Voxel Depth, and Overcuring Depth were the parameters studied. Taguchi Design of Experiments was used to search for the effect of varying these resin constituent concentrations and 3D printing parameters on the curing behavior of 3D printable PPF resins. Our results indicate that resins with higher polymer cross-link density, especially those with a higher content of PPF, are able to be printed at higher voxel depth and with greater success (i.e., high yield). High voxel depth, as long as it does not sacrifice required resolution, is desirable as it speeds printing. Nevertheless, the overall process is governed by the correct setup of the voxel depth in relation to overcuring depth. In regards to resin biocompatibility, it was observed that EA is more effective than DEF, the material we had previously relied on. Our preliminary in vitro cytotoxicity tests indicate that the use of EA does not reduce scaffold biocompatibility as measured by standard cytotoxicity testing (i.e., ISO 10993-5). We demonstrate a workpath for resin constituent concentration optimization through thin film tests and photocrosslinkable process optimization. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: We report here the results of a study of photo-crosslinkable polymer resin component optimization for the 3D printing of resorbable poly(propylene fumarate) (PPF) scaffolds. Resin additives are initially optimized for PPF thin film printing. Once those parameters have been optimized the 3D printing process parameters for PPF objects with complex, porous shapes can be optimized. The design of experiments to optimize both polymer thin films and complex porous resorbable polymer scaffolds is important as a guess and check, or in some cases a systematic method, are very likely to be too time consuming to accomplish. Previously unstudied resin components and process parameters are reported.
Copyright © 2019 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D printing; Additive manufacturing; Bone tissue engineering; Cytotoxicity; Digital Light Processing (DLP); Mask projection; Poly(propylene fumarate); Polymer resin; Scaffold; Stereolithography (SLA)

Year:  2019        PMID: 31352105     DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.07.045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Biomater        ISSN: 1742-7061            Impact factor:   8.947


  7 in total

1.  Automated calibration of 3D-printed microfluidic devices based on computer vision.

Authors:  Junchao Wang; Kaicong Liang; Naiyin Zhang; Hailong Yao; Tsung-Yi Ho; Lingling Sun
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 2.800

Review 2.  Challenges on optimization of 3D-printed bone scaffolds.

Authors:  Marjan Bahraminasab
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 2.819

Review 3.  Hybprinting for musculoskeletal tissue engineering.

Authors:  Jiannan Li; Carolyn Kim; Chi-Chun Pan; Aaron Babian; Elaine Lui; Jeffrey L Young; Seyedsina Moeinzadeh; Sungwoo Kim; Yunzhi Peter Yang
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-04-08

4.  Sequential process optimization for a digital light processing system to minimize trial and error.

Authors:  Jae Won Choi; Gyeong-Ji Kim; Sukjoon Hong; Jeung Hee An; Baek-Jin Kim; Cheol Woo Ha
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 4.996

5.  Investigation and Optimization of the Impact of Printing Orientation on Mechanical Properties of Resin Sample in the Low-Force Stereolithography Additive Manufacturing.

Authors:  Enshuai Wang; Fei Yang; Xinmin Shen; Zhizhong Li; Xiaocui Yang; Xiangpo Zhang; Wenqiang Peng
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 3.748

Review 6.  Advances on Bone Substitutes through 3D Bioprinting.

Authors:  Tullio Genova; Ilaria Roato; Massimo Carossa; Chiara Motta; Davide Cavagnetto; Federico Mussano
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 7.  Embracing Additive Manufacturing Technology through Fused Filament Fabrication for Antimicrobial with Enhanced Formulated Materials.

Authors:  Waleed Ahmed; Sidra Siraj; Ali H Al-Marzouqi
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-09       Impact factor: 4.329

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.