Patient specific in situ 3D printing

Akilbekova, Dana; Mektepbayeva, Damel

doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-100717-4.00004-1

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To tackle these limitations, in situ bioprinting technology emerged to directly print and deposit constructs at the patient's defect site. 115,116 Campbell et al 117 118,119 The ideal in situ bioprinter should scan the exact area of defect to detect the injured site and produce matched printed tissues.…”

Section: Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although, the implantation of fabricated structures has faced to several issues associated to printed tissues integrations with environmental tissues, namely, production of fitted construct for injured area, surgical removal of dead tissues from defect location and risk of contamination. To tackle these limitations, in situ bioprinting technology emerged to directly print and deposit constructs at the patient's defect site 115,116 …”

Section: Challenges and Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Portable hand‐held bioprinters promote in situ tissue regeneration

Pazhouhnia

Beheshtizadeh

Namini

et al. 2022

Bioengineering & Transla Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three‐dimensional bioprinting, as a novel technique of fabricating engineered tissues, is positively correlated with the ultimate goal of regenerative medicine, which is the restoration, reconstruction, and repair of lost and/or damaged tissue function. The progressive trend of this technology resulted in developing the portable hand‐held bioprinters, which could be used quite easily by surgeons and physicians. With the advent of portable hand‐held bioprinters, the obstacles and challenges of utilizing statistical bioprinters could be resolved. This review attempts to discuss the advantages and challenges of portable hand‐held bioprinters via in situ tissue regeneration. All the tissues that have been investigated by this approach were reviewed, including skin, cartilage, bone, dental, and skeletal muscle regeneration, while the tissues that could be regenerated via this approach are targeted in the authors' perspective. The design and applications of hand‐held bioprinters were discussed widely, and the marketed printers were introduced. It has been prospected that these facilities could ameliorate translating the regenerative medicine science from the bench to the bedside actively.

show abstract

Section: Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges and Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Portable hand‐held bioprinters promote in situ tissue regeneration

Pazhouhnia

Beheshtizadeh

Namini

et al. 2022

Bioengineering & Transla Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AM techniques have more recently become known, more generically, as 3D printing. Historically, AM has primarily been used for rapid prototyping for research and development purposes [60] and has been shown to reduce development costs by up to 70% and time to market by 90%; both deemed to be vital in the development and delivery of patient-specific medical implants [61].…”

Section: Laser Sintering Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffoldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laser Sintering Approaches for Bone Tissue Engineering

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of additive manufacturing (AM) techniques into the medical space has revolutionised tissue engineering. Depending upon the tissue type, specific AM approaches are capable of closely matching the physical and biological tissue attributes, to guide tissue regeneration. For hard tissue such as bone, powder bed fusion (PBF) techniques have significant potential, as they are capable of fabricating materials that can match the mechanical requirements necessary to maintain bone functionality and support regeneration. This review focuses on the PBF techniques that utilize laser sintering for creating scaffolds for bone tissue engineering (BTE) applications. Optimal scaffold requirements are explained, ranging from material biocompatibility and bioactivity, to generating specific architectures to recapitulate the porosity, interconnectivity, and mechanical properties of native human bone. The main objective of the review is to outline the most common materials processed using PBF in the context of BTE; initially outlining the most common polymers, including polyamide, polycaprolactone, polyethylene, and polyetheretherketone. Subsequent sections investigate the use of metals and ceramics in similar systems for BTE applications. The last section explores how composite materials can be used. Within each material section, the benefits and shortcomings are outlined, including their mechanical and biological performance, as well as associated printing parameters. The framework provided can be applied to the development of new, novel materials or laser-based approaches to ultimately generate bone tissue analogues or for guiding bone regeneration.

show abstract

“…Finally, a portable 3D printing equipment would be used to print the digitally projected construct directly into the defect site. This methodology could shorten the time window that usually exists between scaffold manufacturing and implantation; moreover, the risk of contamination during scaffold preparation would be decreased [ 339 ]. The duration of the procedure can also be exceptionally short, taking up to one or two minutes for the whole 3D printing process [ 337 , 338 ].…”

Section: Osteochondral Tissue Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

Gonçalves¹,

Moreira²,

Weber

et al. 2021

Pharmaceutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The socioeconomic impact of osteochondral (OC) damage has been increasing steadily over time in the global population, and the promise of tissue engineering in generating biomimetic tissues replicating the physiological OC environment and architecture has been falling short of its projected potential. The most recent advances in OC tissue engineering are summarised in this work, with a focus on electrospun and 3D printed biomaterials combined with stem cells and biochemical stimuli, to identify what is causing this pitfall between the bench and the patients’ bedside. Even though significant progress has been achieved in electrospinning, 3D-(bio)printing, and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technologies, it is still challenging to artificially emulate the OC interface and achieve complete regeneration of bone and cartilage tissues. Their intricate architecture and the need for tight spatiotemporal control of cellular and biochemical cues hinder the attainment of long-term functional integration of tissue-engineered constructs. Moreover, this complexity and the high variability in experimental conditions used in different studies undermine the scalability and reproducibility of prospective regenerative medicine solutions. It is clear that further development of standardised, integrative, and economically viable methods regarding scaffold production, cell selection, and additional biochemical and biomechanical stimulation is likely to be the key to accelerate the clinical translation and fill the gap in OC treatment.

show abstract

Patient specific in situ 3D printing

Cited by 19 publications

References 55 publications

Portable hand‐held bioprinters promote in situ tissue regeneration

Portable hand‐held bioprinters promote in situ tissue regeneration

Laser Sintering Approaches for Bone Tissue Engineering

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About