A Comprehensive Review of Bioinks and 3D Printing: Bridging the Gap Between Innovation and Practicality
کلمات کلیدی:
Bioink, Additive manufacturing, Rheology, Shear Thinning, Extrusion Bioprinting, Printabilityچکیده
Bioinks, polymer matrices printed alongside cells, simulate an extracellular matrix environment that supports cell viability and proliferation. These bioinks can be composed of hydrogels, synthetic polymers, or other specialized materials, each offering unique properties beneficial to tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Various additive manufacturing techniques exist, but extrusion-based methods are favored for bioprinting due to their compatibility with various biomaterials. Direct Ink Writing (DIW) stands out for its precision and versatility. DIW process involves extrusion, solidification, and layer support, with theoretical underpinnings based on Deborah and Weissenberg numbers, which describe the flow behavior of the bioink. Improving nanoparticle and matric interaction yet considering cytotoxicity and cell viability during the extrusion process is a novel challenge that needs to be deeply studied. Types of particle-particle and matrix-particle forces within inks are discussed to introduce the critical concept of percolation threshold in nanomaterials and polymer matrices. This concept is essential for understanding and optimizing printed constructs' mechanical properties and functionality. Recent research highlights that viscosity modifiers enhance printability and shape fidelity but can adversely affect cell viability. Addressing these challenges is crucial for advancing the field of bioprinting and realizing its full potential in medical applications.
دانلودها
مراجع
1. Zhang, C.Y., et al., Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Decellularized Extracellular Matrix-Based Bioinks for Tissue Engineering. Molecules, 2022. 27(11).
2. Nguyen, D.G., et al., Bioprinted 3D Primary Liver Tissues Allow Assessment of Organ-Level Response to Clinical Drug Induced Toxicity In Vitro. PLoS One, 2016. 11(7): p. e0158674.
3. Dasari, A., J. Xue, and S. Deb, Magnetic Nanoparticles in Bone Tissue Engineering. Nanomaterials (Basel), 2022. 12(5).
4. Schwab, A., et al., Printability and Shape Fidelity of Bioinks in 3D Bioprinting. Chem Rev, 2020. 120(19): p. 11028-11055.
5. Unagolla, J.M. and A.C. Jayasuriya, Hydrogel-based 3D bioprinting: A comprehensive review on cell-laden hydrogels, bioink formulations, and future perspectives. Appl Mater Today, 2020. 18.
6. Chang, C.C., et al., Direct-write bioprinting three-dimensional biohybrid systems for future regenerative therapies. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2011. 98(1): p. 160-70.
7. Koch, L., et al., Skin tissue generation by laser cell printing. Biotechnol Bioeng, 2012. 109(7): p. 1855-63.
8. Lee, H.J., et al., A New Approach for Fabricating Collagen/ECM-Based Bioinks Using Preosteoblasts and Human Adipose Stem Cells. Adv Healthc Mater, 2015. 4(9): p. 1359-68.
9. Zhang, Y., et al., In Vitro Study of Directly Bioprinted Perfusable Vasculature Conduits. Biomater Sci, 2015. 3(1): p. 134-43.
10. Lee, K.Y. and D.J. Mooney, Alginate: properties and biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci, 2012. 37(1): p. 106-126.
11. Yan, J., Y. Huang, and D.B. Chrisey, Laser-assisted printing of alginate long tubes and annular constructs. Biofabrication, 2013. 5(1): p. 015002.
12. Jia, J., et al., Engineering alginate as bioink for bioprinting. Acta Biomater, 2014. 10(10): p. 4323-31.
13. Li, W., et al., Current drug research on PEGylation with small molecular agents. Progress in Polymer Science, 2013. 38(3): p. 421-444.
14. Rutz, A.L., et al., A multimaterial bioink method for 3D printing tunable, cell-compatible hydrogels. Adv Mater, 2015. 27(9): p. 1607-14.
15. Gungor-Ozkerim, P.S., et al., Bioinks for 3D bioprinting: an overview. Biomater Sci, 2018. 6(5): p. 915-946.
16. Skardal, A., et al., Dynamically crosslinked gold nanoparticle - hyaluronan hydrogels. Adv Mater, 2010. 22(42): p. 4736-40.
17. Di Marzio, N., et al., Bio-Fabrication: Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nano-Biomaterials in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2020. 8: p. 326.
18. Dey, M. and I.T. Ozbolat, 3D bioprinting of cells, tissues and organs. Scientific Reports, 2020. 10(1): p. 14023.
19. Kearns, E.R., R. Gillespie, and D.M. D'Alessandro, 3D printing of metal–organic framework composite materials for clean energy and environmental applications. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 2021. 9(48): p. 27252-27270.
20. Hospodiuk, M., et al., The bioink: A comprehensive review on bioprintable materials. Biotechnol Adv, 2017. 35(2): p. 217-239.
21. Hölzl, K., et al., Bioink properties before, during and after 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication, 2016. 8(3): p. 032002.
22. Habib, M.A. and B. Khoda, Rheological Analysis of Bio-ink for 3D Bio-printing Processes. J Manuf Process, 2022. 76: p. 708-718.
23. Schwab, A., et al., Printability and Shape Fidelity of Bioinks in 3D Bioprinting. Chemical Reviews, 2020. 120(19): p. 11028-11055.
24. Young, A.J., et al., Direct ink writing of catalytically active UiO-66 polymer composites. Chemical Communications, 2019. 55(15): p. 2190-2193.
25. Rau, D., M. Bortner, and C. Williams, A Rheology Roadmap for Evaluating the Printability of Material Extrusion Inks. Additive Manufacturing, 2023. 75: p. 103745.
26. Rau, D., C. Williams, and M. Bortner, Rheology and Printability: A Survey of Critical Relationships for Direct Ink Write Materials Design. Progress in Materials Science, 2023. 140: p. 101188.
27. Wei, P., et al., Go with the flow: Rheological requirements for direct ink write printability. Journal of Applied Physics, 2023. 134(10).
28. Scott, P., et al., Polymer-Inorganic Hybrid Colloids for Ultraviolet-Assisted Direct Ink Write of Polymer Nanocomposites. Additive Manufacturing, 2020. 35: p. 101393.
29. Toker, O., et al., Three interval thixotropy test (3ITT) in food applications: A novel technique to determine structural regeneration of mayonnaise under different shear conditions. Food Research International, 2015. 70.
30. Arrigo, R. and G. Malucelli, Rheological Behavior of Polymer/Carbon Nanotube Composites: An Overview. Materials (Basel), 2020. 13(12).
31. Mun, S.C., et al., A new approach to determine rheological percolation of carbon nanotubes in microstructured polymer matrices. Carbon, 2014. 67: p. 64–71.
32. Tadros, T., Interparticle interactions in concentrated suspensions and their bulk (Rheological) properties. Advances in colloid and interface science, 2011. 168: p. 263-77.
33. Yuk, H., et al., 3D printing of conducting polymers. Nature Communications, 2020. 11(1): p. 1604.
34. Mohammadi, M.M., et al., Additive manufacturing of recyclable, highly conductive, and structurally robust graphite structures. Additive Manufacturing Letters, 2022. 3: p. 100061.
35. Patil, R. and S. Alimperti, Graphene in 3D Bioprinting. J Funct Biomater, 2024. 15(4).
36. Li, J., et al., Correlations between Percolation Threshold, Dispersion State, and Aspect Ratio of Carbon Nanotubes. Advanced Functional Materials, 2007. 17: p. 3207-3215.
37. Guan, X., et al., Direct Writing Supercapacitors Using a Carbon Nanotube/Ag Nanoparticle-Based Ink on Cellulose Acetate Membrane Paper. Polymers, 2019. 11: p. 973.
