Recent Cell Printing Systems for Tissue Engineering

Lee, Hyeongjin; Koo, Young Won; Yeo, Miji; Kim, Su Hon; Kim, GeunHyung

doi:10.18063/ijb.2017.01.004

Cited by 46 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 78 publications

(152 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The field has indeed been widely investigated by the scientific community and numerous solutions have been advanced based on various nanotechnology platforms and microfluidic devices 35,36 . Nevertheless many issues have yet to be solved, especially considering the possibility to transfer these technologies to the surgery practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all the cases, this requires considerable time and precise integration between the cell layers. Table 1 reassumes most diffused methods and describes their advantages and disadvantages 36 , while the last column describes the proposed in this paper technology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Patterning of cells in Magnetic Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering

Goranov

Shelyakova

Santis

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A three dimensional magnetic patterning of two cell types was realised in vitro inside an additive manufactured magnetic scaffold, as a conceptual precursor for the vascularised tissue. The realisation of separate arrangements of vascular and osteoprogenitor cells, labelled with biocompatible magnetic nanoparticles, was established on the opposite sides of the scaffold fibres under the effect of nonhomogeneous magnetic gradients and loading magnetic configuration. The magnetisation of the scaffold amplified the guiding effects by an additional trapping of cells due to short range magnetic forces. The mathematical modelling confirmed the strong enhancement of the magnetic gradients and their particular geometrical distribution near the fibres, defining the preferential cell positioning on the micro-scale. The manipulation of cells inside suitably designed magnetic scaffolds represents a unique solution for the assembling of cellular constructs organised in biologically adequate arrangements.Nanotechnology and nanomaterials provide numerous innovative solutions for tissue engineering, aiming at radical reinforcement and renovation of clinical practice. The rapidly growing field of tissue engineering points at the regeneration of damaged tissues, rather than their substitution, and promotes that by implanting templates for tissue regeneration, typically represented by ceramic or polymeric scaffolds 1 . The implantation of bare cell-free scaffolds has serious limitations, especially considering the regular development of the vascular network in the regenerated tissue 2,3 . The most promising solution to this problem is the in vitro pre-loading of scaffolds with cells and/or growth factors before the implantation. The realisation of a correct distribution of cells inside the three-dimensional scaffolds is a key element for the maximally complete regeneration 1,4 . On the other hand, the manipulation and seeding of cells throughout the whole volume of the scaffold is an extremely challenging task and can be partially achieved via technologically sophisticated platforms 5 , barely compatible with routine clinical practice. Moreover, most tissues and organs are composed of various types of cells, preferentially arranged in complex 3D architectures, where they interact with each other and with the organism as a whole 6,7 , complicating further the requisites for a correct pre-loading. A partial solution to this challenging demand consists in the employment of the predominant cell type which defines the main tissue function 8 . This approach is generally suitable for relatively homogeneous tissues, such as cartilage, where tissue development should not be actively supported by other cell types 9 . For other tissues the achievement of efficient vascularisation, cell migration and organisation of the extracellular matrix 10 should be necessarily supported by assembles of different cell types inside the scaffold before implantation 11 .In this paper we propose a new, versatile and easy-to-implement method promoting the three-...

show abstract

“…Additive manufacturing is at the core of 3D printing, which enables researchers, manufacturers, and individuals to construct complex 3D architectures in a layer‐by‐layer manner . Due to its high versatility, 3D printing has been applied in various fields, including the manufacture of products and artificial biological substitutes for the regeneration of tissues . Furthermore, 3D bioprinting has advanced the regeneration of damaged tissues/organs by allowing the reproduction of a 3D structure mimicking the natural extracellular matrix (ECM).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

4D Bioprinting: Technological Advances in Biofabrication

Yang

Yeo

Koo

et al. 2019

Macromolecular Bioscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

its innate properties, or in response to external stimuli. Specifically, the SME can be seen in hybrid structures composed of a smart material and static material due to their inhomogeneity and different properties. [9,10] On the other hand, various stimuli, such as light, temperature, and humidity, can cause SMEs when a smart material converts the stimulus/energy into dynamic movement. With a detailed understanding of the properties of smart materials and their responses to stimuli, 4D printing can be utilized to precisely fabricate a "programmed" dimension that transforms and/or recovers its shape in response to stimuli. Many such smart materials have been developed, thus confirming the feasibility of 4D printing (Figure 1a).In this review, the concept of 4D bioprinting and smart materials will be defined by 4D mechanisms of SMEs and stimulus-responsive mechanisms. Then, 4D bioprinting will be categorized according to the types and cases of biomedical smart materials and applications. The current limitations and future aspects will also be discussed. Four-dimensional Mechanisms: Shape-Morphing EffectsFour-dimensional printing is essentially a 3D printing technique combined with one more dimension, that is, the SME by pre-set stimuli. The SME in 4D printing occurs after printing of the 3D structure, which is printer-independent but still predictable as the effect is programmed beforehand. [11] The types of SME-inducing stimuli will be discussed in the following section. In this section, SMEs will be classified according to the shape recovery ability of the 4D-printed structure. The SME of 4D structures with no shape recovery ability can be classified as one-way SME, while SMEs with shape recovery ability is classified as two-or multi-way SME. One-Way Shape MorphingOne-way SME refers to a 4D structure that is designed to change its structure once and is not able to recover its original shape by itself. This irreversibility of one-way SME is shown in Figure 1b. [12] One-way SME is distinguished from normal deformations, such as degradation, contraction, and swelling, as the deformation can be designed and predicted, that is, artificially programmed. One-way SME is a relatively simple mechanism compared to two-or multi-way SME. BioprintingThe development of the three-dimensional (3D) printer has resulted in significant advances in a number of fields, including rapid prototyping and biomedical devices. For 3D structures, the inclusion of dynamic responses to stimuli is added to develop the concept of four-dimensional (4D) printing. Typically, 4D printing is useful for biofabrication by reproducing a stimulus-responsive dynamic environment corresponding to physiological activities. Such a dynamic environment can be precisely designed with an understanding of shape-morphing effects (SMEs), which enables mimicking the functionality or intricate geometry of tissues. Here, 4D bioprinting is investigated for clinical use, for example, in drug delivery systems, tissue engineering, and surgery in vivo. This review presents ...

show abstract

“…Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement have been proposed and considered as guidelines for animal trials in academic and industrial research. In vitro three‐dimensional (3D) tissue models mimic the cell arrangements in native tissues and organs, meanwhile, provide us effective and productive tools for disease research and drug evaluation (Katt et al, ; H. Lee, Koo, Yeo, Kim, & Kim, ). Therefore, an in vitro retinal tissue model is meaningful for investigation of disease mechanism and regenerative strategies, overcoming current limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A bilayer photoreceptor-retinal tissue model with gradient cell density design: A study of microvalve-based bioprinting

Shi

Tan

Yeong

et al. 2018

J Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ARPE-19 and Y79 cells were precisely and effectively delivered to form an in vitro retinal tissue model via 3D cell bioprinting technology. The samples were characterized by cell viability assay, haematoxylin and eosin and immunofluorescent staining, scanning electrical microscopy and confocal microscopy, and so forth. The bioprinted ARPE-19 cells formed a high-quality cell monolayer in 14 days. Manually seeded ARPE-19 cells were poorly controlled during and after cell seeding, and they aggregated to form uneven cell layer. The Y79 cells were subsequently bioprinted on the ARPE-19 cell monolayer to form 2 distinctive patterns. The microvalve-based bioprinting is efficient and accurate to build the in vitro tissue models with the potential to provide similar pathological responses and mechanism to human diseases, to mimic the phenotypic endpoints that are comparable with clinical studies, and to provide a realistic prediction of clinical efficacy.

show abstract

“…Whitford and Hoying review recent development in bioinks that support vascularization [2] . Lee et al review recent bioprinter modifications for developing new cell printing systems [3] . Koch et al present a parametric study of laser for laser-assisted bioprinting [4] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cell powered biobots and more perspectives for IJB

Chua¹

1970

IJB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the end of 2016, International Journal of Bioprinting (IJB) is able to estimate its first mock impact factor. Based on one issue published in 2015, the 2016 mock impact factor for IJB is calculated to be 6, excluding self-citations! This result is surprising, impressive and encouraging. However, this is just a beginning and more and more quality articles and reviews are needed in order to maintain it.

show abstract

Recent Cell Printing Systems for Tissue Engineering

Cited by 46 publications

References 78 publications

3D Patterning of cells in Magnetic Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering

4D Bioprinting: Technological Advances in Biofabrication

A bilayer photoreceptor-retinal tissue model with gradient cell density design: A study of microvalve-based bioprinting

Cell powered biobots and more perspectives for IJB

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About