Adipose tissue regeneration

A review of bioengineering techniques applied to breast tissue: Mechanical properties, tissue engineering and finite element analysis

“…Techniques to produce scaffolds include 3D printing, which is currently a promising and growing approach since idealized tissues/organs can be developed, combining cells with biomaterials into scaffolds ( Mandrycky et al, 2016 ) to accurately mimic the native tissue ( O’Halloran N. et al, 2018 ) ( Figure 7 ). In 3D printing, a 3D construct is developed in a layer-by-layer fashion from a computer-aided design, being possible to produce custom designs with complex internal morphology and perform controlled material extrusion to achieve the desired biomechanical properties ( Chae et al, 2018 ; Mohseni et al, 2018 ). There are different 3D printing techniques, such as inkjet, extrusion, laser-assisted, and stereolithography printing ( Figure 7 ) ( Chae et al, 2018 ; Cleversey et al, 2019 ).…”

“…In the particular case of adipose tissue regeneration, those cells are ADSCs (10 μ m), differentiated adipocytes (100 μ m), and mature adipose tissue lobules (300–500 μ m) ( Chae et al, 2018 ). The pore size must be adequate to simultaneously support angiogenesis and adipogenesis ( Mohseni et al, 2018 ).…”

“… Workflow representing the most common post-breast cancer diagnosis steps that involve a mastectomy or lumpectomy. The advantages and disadvantages of each procedure are presented ( Patrick, 2004 ; Combellack et al, 2016 ; Rocco et al, 2016 ; Visscher et al, 2017 ; O’Halloran N. A. et al, 2018 ; Chae et al, 2018 ; Mohseni et al, 2018 ; Cleversey et al, 2019 ; Rocco et al, 2019 ; Donnely et al, 2020 ; Janzekovic et al, 2020 ). The dashed line represents the research-only procedures, while the full lines represent the current clinically available treatments.…”

“…However, it lacks structural support and vasculature, which results overtime in a stress-induced volume loss of 20%–70% due to the applied forces ( Visscher et al, 2017 ), requiring additional lipotransfer sessions to obtain the desired outcomes ( Chhaya et al, 2016 ; O’Halloran N. A. et al, 2018 ). Even though autologous reconstruction results in a more natural shape, feel, and texture, avoids the foreign body immune response, and is compatible with radiotherapy ( Combellack et al, 2016 ), this technique is more complex, time-consuming, expensive, and causes morbidity at the donor site ( O’Halloran N. A. et al, 2018 ; Cleversey et al, 2019 ; Janzekovic et al, 2020 ), not being suitable for large defects due to the lack of adequate vasculature ( Chhaya et al, 2016 ; Mohseni et al, 2018 ). However, solutions have been studied in order to enrich the fat graft with autologous ADSCs ( Cleversey et al, 2019 ).…”

Fabrication and investigation of physicochemical and biological properties of3Dprinted sodium alginate‐chitosan blend polyelectrolyte complex scaffold for bone tissue engineering application

“…Whereas, natural biopolymers such as chitosan, 7 alginate, 8 gelatin, 9 silk fibroin, 10 fibrin 11 and so forth have been the choice of the researchers for their use in scaffold development because of their several favorable properties like hydrophilicity, biodegradability, biocompatibility and the presence of bioactive molecules that can stimulate the cellular processes during the cell-material interaction which is the most important phenomenon for the new tissue regeneration. [12][13][14] For the fabrication of biopolymeric scaffold, various methods have been employed such as freeze drying, 15 freeze gelation, 16 electrospinning, 17 gas foaming, 18 solvent casting, 19 three-dimensional (3D) printing 20 and so forth. Among these, 3D printing method is considered the most favorable technique that offers many advantages over the other fabrication techniques including its control over the customized 3D architecture, shape, size, and interconnected pore structure of the scaffold, ability to mimic the natural tissue structure and can facilitate the development of patient specific tissue graft.…”