Biocompatible 3D printed polymers via fused deposition modelling direct C₂C₁₂ cellular phenotype in vitro

Abstract

The capability to 3D print bespoke biologically receptive parts within short time periods has driven the growing prevalence of additive manufacture (AM) technology within biological settings, however limited research concerning cellular interaction with 3D printed polymers has been undertaken. In this work, we used skeletal muscle CC cell line in order to ascertain critical evidence of cellular behaviour in response to multiple bio-receptive candidate polymers; polylactic acid (PLA), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polycarbonate (PC) 3D printed via fused deposition modelling (FDM). The extrusion based nature of FDM elicited polymer specific topographies, within which CC cells exhibited reduced metabolic activity when compared to optimised surfaces of tissue culture plastic, however assay viability readings remained high across polymers outlining viable phenotypes. CC cells exhibited consistently high levels of morphological alignment across polymers, however differential myotube widths and levels of transcriptional myogenin expression appeared to demonstrate response specific thresholds at which varying polymer selection potentiates cellular differentiation, elicits pre-mature early myotube formation and directs subsequent morphological phenotype. Here we observed biocompatible AM polymers manufactured via FDM, which also appear to hold the potential to simultaneously manipulate the desired biological phenotype and enhance the biomimicry of skeletal muscle cells in vitro via AM polymer choice and careful selection of machine processing parameters. When considered in combination with the associated design freedom of AM, this may provide the opportunity to not only enhance the efficiency of creating biomimetic models, but also to precisely control the biological output within such scaffolds.

Feasibility and Biocompatibility of 3D‐Printed Photopolymerized and Laser Sintered Polymers for Neuronal, Myogenic, and Hepatic Cell Types

“…VeroClear‐RGD810 (VeroClear) and PA‐12 samples were removed from build plates and cleaned using a soft abrasive brush to remove supports and unsintered powder, respectively. All samples were sterilized via UV for ≥1 h, prior to being adhered to culture well plates using an in‐house bioadhesive (aquarium glue) that has been found to be biocompatible . Once adhered, samples were rinsed with 70% IMS and left for remaining liquid to evaporate, prior to being further treated with 1× phosphate buffered saline (PBS).…”

“…FDM affords a variety of biocompatible polymers with the capability to control and influence cellular phenotype; however, such compatibility is, in part, negated when geometries with design features of increasing complexity are required. Despite being the most widely used, inexpensive, and readily available 3D printing process, the diverse application of AM across scientific disciplines has elicited a trend toward the commercialization of alternative processes capable of manufacturing such advanced geometries.…”

3D Printed Biosensor Arrays for Medical Diagnostics

“…Microfluidic devices printed using FDM can show leakage and shape deformation if printing parameters and thermoplastic polymer are not carefully tuned [37]. FDM has also been successfully used for 3D bioprinting living cells in thermoplastic matrices without loss of cell viability [41,42]. Reproduced with permission from [35].…”

Multifaceted polymeric materials in three‐dimensional processing (3DP) technologies: Current progress and prospects

“…Thermoplastic polymer materials such as ABS, PLA, PA, PC, poly(ethylene‐oxide)‐poly(propylene‐oxide) as well as thermosetting polymer materials like epoxy resins have been processed. For example, Rimington et al reported biocompatible polymers (PLA, ABS, polyethylene terephthalate, and PC) which exhibited morphological alignment and early differentiation of C 2 C 12 cells when cultured directly on the FDM printed scaffold. The biocompatible polymers also allow reduction in complexity and enhance efficiency of the engineering methods as well as the biomimicry of skeletal muscle cells in vitro, in addition to potentially modulate biological phenotypes.…”