Smart Microsystems for Active Cell Culture, Growth and Gene Expression Toward Relevant Tissues

Lantada, Andrés Díaz; Mayola, Enrique Colomer; Merodio, María Consuelo Huerta Gómez de; Muslija, A.; Ruiz, Josefa Predestinación García; Iniesta, Hernán Alarcón

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-29328-8_14

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In most materials, Poisson's ratio, usually denoted by ], is a positive value. Materials with negative Poisson's ratio (NPR) are called auxetic materials [4][5][6][7]. The first mechanical model of a structure exhibiting NPR was described by Almgren (1985) [8], and the first thermodynamic model of a system forming a phase with NPR, which means that the auxetic structure phase was built spontaneously by the model's molecules, was studied by performing computer simulations [9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A series of focus issues on auxetics has been published by Wojciechowski et al (2016) [13]. Auxetic structural materials can exhibit enhanced and improved properties over conventional materials; for example, they can increase indentation resistance and provide good shock-absorptive properties [6,7,14,15]. Fabrication of auxetic structural scaffolds can be achieved by transforming the cell structure from a convex polyhedral shape to a concave or reentrant shape in which cell ribs protrude inward.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

MG-63 Cell Proliferation with Static or Dynamic Compressive Stimulation on an Auxetic PLGA Scaffold

Kim

Choi

Cho

et al. 2017

International Journal of Polymer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of dynamic compressive stimulation on MG-63 cell proliferation on an auxetic PLGA scaffold was investigated. The estimated Poisson ratio of the prepared auxetic scaffold specimens was approximately (−)0.07, while the Poisson ratio estimated for conventional scaffold specimens was (+)0.12 under 10% strain compression on average. Three stimulus groups were examined: control (no stimulation), static compression, and dynamic compression. In preparation for proliferation testing, cells were seeded at 2.2 × 105 cells/80 μL on each scaffold specimen. The average proliferation rates of the static and dynamic groups were higher than those of the control group: 13.4% and 25.5% higher at culture day 1, 34.7% and 56.2% at culture day 3, and 17.5% and 43.0% at culture day 5, respectively. The static and dynamic group results at culture day 5 were significantly different (p<0.01). Moreover, proliferation rate of the dynamic stimulation group was 1.22 times higher than that of the static group (p<0.01). Conclusively, proliferation of osteoblast-like cells was enhanced through compressive stimulation, but the enhancement was maximal with dynamic compressive stimulation of auxetic scaffolds.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MG-63 Cell Proliferation with Static or Dynamic Compressive Stimulation on an Auxetic PLGA Scaffold

Kim

Choi

Cho

et al. 2017

International Journal of Polymer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These are complex multifunctional devices that allow recording the biophysical and biochemical parameters of biological objects and exerting active control on those parameters for treatment or research. [8][9][10][11][12][13] The functionality of such systems is provided by micro-and nanotools, for the production of which high-resolution additive methods are used. These are various optical, electronic, mechanical microand nanostructures that are used as activators, capsules for transporting cells or active substances, elements of microfluidic systems, sensors, microelectrode arrays, etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printed Biohybrid Microsystems

Prinz

Fritzler

2022

Adv Materials Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

are not able to fully meet the challenges related to the creation of such systems. A number of methods are known that make it possible to form 3D structures, for example, Rolling-Up technology and imprint lithography. [1][2][3][4] However, a rather short list of materials that can be used in such technologies and a too narrow range of 3D shapes that can be fabricated using these methods seriously limit the application fields of the techniques. It seems that additive manufacturing (AM) technology, or 3D printing, presents a much more universal and promising technological approach in this field. AM technology is the process of forming structures and devices by layer-by-layer (or pointby-point) application of materials in accordance with a 3D digital computer aided design (CAD) model. [5] The results of recent years convincingly show that the rapidly progressing AM technology, which uses the widest range of materials, including biological ones, has become the technological basis and the driving force of new breakthrough fields, including biology and medicine. [6,7] The purpose of our review is to analyze the role and achievements of 3D micro-and nanoprinting in the development of one of the most advanced fields, biohybrid systems (BHS), formed by the integration of at least one biological component with at least one artificial element. In the creation of such systems, the desire was manifested to combine the unique capabilities of living biosystems, having been perfected during the millions of years of evolution, with the functionality of artificially made structures. This integration leads to a synergistic effect and significantly expands the capabilities of the devices being created, which are in demand in various fields, primarily in biology and medicine. This review by no means aims to provide an exhaustive picture of the entire field of biohybrid materials and structures; instead, it is devoted to the consideration of smart biohybrid microsystems. These are complex multifunctional devices that allow recording the biophysical and biochemical parameters of biological objects and exerting active control on those parameters for treatment or research. [8][9][10][11][12][13] The functionality of such systems is provided by micro-and nanotools, for the production of which high-resolution additive methods are used. These are various optical, electronic, mechanical microand nanostructures that are used as activators, capsules for transporting cells or active substances, elements of microfluidic systems, sensors, microelectrode arrays, etc. The review addresses the formation and integration of such structures into smart biohybrid microsystems. The review outlines the most This review is devoted to the role of 3D printing in the development of a new high-tech field, smart biohybrid microsystems. The motivation behind the development of this field is the intention to integrate the capabilities of biological systems optimized in the course of evolution with the achievements of modern methods of forming micro-and nanostructu...

show abstract

Smart Microsystems for Active Cell Culture, Growth and Gene Expression Toward Relevant Tissues

Cited by 2 publications

References 34 publications

MG-63 Cell Proliferation with Static or Dynamic Compressive Stimulation on an Auxetic PLGA Scaffold

MG-63 Cell Proliferation with Static or Dynamic Compressive Stimulation on an Auxetic PLGA Scaffold

3D Printed Biohybrid Microsystems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About