Laser-based bioprinting for multilayer cell patterning in tissue engineering and cancer research

Yang, Haowei; Yang, Kai‐Hung; Narayan, Roger J.; Ma, Shaohua

doi:10.1042/ebc20200093

Cited by 21 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with inkjet printing technology, this technology can avoid direct contact between bioink and processing devices, which does not cause mechanical shear damage to cells. This method can print higher-viscosity biomaterials, and the applicable range is wider than inkjet printing [ 109 ]. However, this technology is still mainly in the research stage and has few applications.…”

Section: Three-dimensional Bioprinting Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering Scaffolds

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has emerged as a promising scaffold fabrication strategy for tissue engineering with excellent control over scaffold geometry and microstructure. Nanobiomaterials as bioinks play a key role in manipulating the cellular microenvironment to alter its growth and development. This review first introduces the commonly used nanomaterials in tissue engineering scaffolds, including natural polymers, synthetic polymers, and polymer derivatives, and reveals the improvement of nanomaterials on scaffold performance. Second, the 3D bioprinting technologies of inkjet-based bioprinting, extrusion-based bioprinting, laser-assisted bioprinting, and stereolithography bioprinting are comprehensively itemized, and the advantages and underlying mechanisms are revealed. Then the convergence of 3D bioprinting and nanotechnology applications in tissue engineering scaffolds, such as bone, nerve, blood vessel, tendon, and internal organs, are discussed. Finally, the challenges and perspectives of convergence of 3D bioprinting and nanotechnology are proposed. This review will provide scientific guidance to develop 3D bioprinting tissue engineering scaffolds by nanotechnology.

show abstract

Section: Three-dimensional Bioprinting Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering Scaffolds

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…LAB uses laser‐induced forward transfer, in which high‐pressure bubbles are generated by a high‐energy laser pulse in a thin biomaterial layer, ejecting it onto a specific area 286 . This precise process enables accurate biomaterial deposition, making LAB a promising technique for complex tissue fabrication in TME reconstructions 287 . LAB offers the advantages of accommodating a wide range of viscosity, ensuring high cell viability, and achieving high resolution.…”

Section: In Vitro Preclinical Model For Tumor Immunology Investigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomarkers and experimental models for cancer immunology investigation

Xu,

Jia,

Liu

et al. 2023

MedComm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid advancement of tumor immunotherapies poses challenges for the tools used in cancer immunology research, highlighting the need for highly effective biomarkers and reproducible experimental models. Current immunotherapy biomarkers encompass surface protein markers such as PD‐L1, genetic features such as microsatellite instability, tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes, and biomarkers in liquid biopsy such as circulating tumor DNAs. Experimental models, ranging from 3D in vitro cultures (spheroids, submerged models, air–liquid interface models, organ‐on‐a‐chips) to advanced 3D bioprinting techniques, have emerged as valuable platforms for cancer immunology investigations and immunotherapy biomarker research. By preserving native immune components or coculturing with exogenous immune cells, these models replicate the tumor microenvironment in vitro. Animal models like syngeneic models, genetically engineered models, and patient‐derived xenografts provide opportunities to study in vivo tumor‐immune interactions. Humanized animal models further enable the simulation of the human‐specific tumor microenvironment. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the advantages, limitations, and prospects of different biomarkers and experimental models, specifically focusing on the role of biomarkers in predicting immunotherapy outcomes and the ability of experimental models to replicate the tumor microenvironment. By integrating cutting‐edge biomarkers and experimental models, this review serves as a valuable resource for accessing the forefront of cancer immunology investigation.

show abstract

“…1,2 It enables the fabrication of three-dimensional cell-laden constructs analogous to living tissues using biomaterial, additives, among others (bioinks) via a layer-by-layer pattern of pre-designed files laid down to meet specific objectives of the manufacturer or investigators. 3,4 Recently, a number of 3D bioprinting technologies have been developed, including laser-based bioprinting, 5 inkjet-based printing, 6 valve-based printing, 7,8 and extrusion-based printing. 9,10 These techniques have their advantages and limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and characterization of 3D bioprintable and mechanically reinforced hydrogel based on gellan gum/methylcellulose/cellulose nanocrystals

Ouiyangkul,

Hirun,

Suknuntha

et al. 2023

Polymers for Advanced Techs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract3D bioprinting has appeared as a promising technology in the area of tissue engineering. Here, bioinks composed of various concentrations of gellan gum (GG), methylcellulose (MC) and cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) were developed for extrusion‐based bioprinting. Among the binary mixtures of GG/MC, the blend of 1% w/w GG and 4% w/w MC (1GG/4MC) provides the best property to further tailoring as bioink. For the ternary mixtures of GG/MC/CNC, 1GG/4MC/4% w/w CNC (1GG/4MC/4CNC) provide the best printability characteristic but not sufficient mechanical performance. Ionic crosslinking using various concentrations of salts including CaCl2, KCl and NaCl were applied to improve the mechanical strength. Both 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.022% w/w CaCl2 (1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.022CaCl2) and 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.075% w/w KCl (1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.075KCl) exhibit mechanical stability with good printability. Both provide higher compressive modulus than 1GG/4MC/4CNC and 1GG/4MC, and show great shear‐thinning and thixotropic behaviors. They show porous microstructure and sufficient swelling ratio to maintain high cell viability. Excellent biocompatibility of 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.022CaCl2 and 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.075KCl is demonstrated with cell viability of 119.55% and 100.77%, respectively, based on MTT assay. A good cell viability of 97%–98% up to 14 days was attained for both bioprinted constructs. Taken together, these novel 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.022CaCl2 and 1GG/4MC/4CNC/0.075KCl hydrogels exhibit good attributes for a promising 3D bioprinting material.

show abstract

Laser-based bioprinting for multilayer cell patterning in tissue engineering and cancer research

Cited by 21 publications

References 62 publications

Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering Scaffolds

Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering Scaffolds

Biomarkers and experimental models for cancer immunology investigation

Development and characterization of 3D bioprintable and mechanically reinforced hydrogel based on gellan gum/methylcellulose/cellulose nanocrystals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About