3D Bioprinting in Skeletal Muscle Tissue Engineering

Abstract

Skeletal muscle tissue engineering (SMTE) aims at repairing defective skeletal muscles. Until now, numerous developments are made in SMTE; however, it is still challenging to recapitulate the complexity of muscles with current methods of fabrication. Here, after a brief description of the anatomy of skeletal muscle and a short state‐of‐the‐art on developments made in SMTE with “conventional methods,” the use of 3D bioprinting as a new tool for SMTE is in focus. The current bioprinting methods are discussed, and an overview of the bioink formulations and properties used in 3D bioprinting is provided. Finally, different advances made in SMTE by 3D bioprinting are highlighted, and future needs and a short perspective are provided.

Information-Driven Design as a Potential Approach for 3D Printing of Skeletal Muscle Biomimetic Scaffolds

“…An ideal bioink should (i) provide tissue-specific biological, physical and mechanical cues, (ii) be biocompatible and (iii) have good printability and biodegradability [ 17 ]. Possible limitations for the fabrication process can be related to the rheological characteristics of the hydrogel, the shear stress values experienced by cells during the process and the photopolymerization needed to crosslink the scaffold, which in the end may negatively affect cell viability [ 12 ].…”

“…Different and specific bioinks, both natural and synthetic, have already been considered for bioprinting SM constructs [ 12 , 18 ]. Synthetic bioinks are characterized by tunable mechanical properties and crosslinking capacity, but also by insufficient cellular adhesion.…”

“…Dealing with a comprehensive tissue engineering protocol underlines, therefore, the necessity of developing a biomimetic approach to preparing an integrated materials/cells/signaling construct that orchestrates a univocal result. For this aim, several proposals targeted at muscle regeneration have already been presented, focusing on (i) the materials, synthetic and natural ones, and their combinations [ 5 , 6 , 9 ], (ii) the fabrication techniques to evaluate their role on scaffold morphology and properties [ 10 , 11 , 12 ], (iii) the surface functionalization [ 13 ], (iv) the cells to be used, stem cells or already committed [ 6 , 10 ], (v) the addition of different nanomaterials to deal with constructs responsive to electrical, magnetic and photothermal stimulation [ 14 ] and (vi) the methods to specifically induce vascularization, innervation and contractility [ 10 , 13 ]. More than interesting and promising findings have been reported; however, the proper cellular microenvironment to bioengineer the SM construct has not, to date, been found, and there is still a clinical need to introduce new strategies that can facilitate safe and large muscle tissue repair and regeneration [ 13 ].…”

Clinical Perspectives on 3D Bioprinting Paradigms for Regenerative Medicine

“…Skeletal muscle comprises nearly half of our body weight and is involved in supporting the skeletal system, providing movement, and even regulating metabolism [118]. Aside from the structural and functional changes that evolve naturally with aging, the need for skeletal muscle replacement may arise from myopathies, accidents, or surgery.…”

“…Aside from the structural and functional changes that evolve naturally with aging, the need for skeletal muscle replacement may arise from myopathies, accidents, or surgery. In the United States alone, 4.5 million reconstructive surgeries are performed every year [118]. Traditionally, the most promising treatment option for skeletal muscle has been multiple cell injections into the damaged area.…”