Cell Bioprinting: The 3D-Bioplotter™ Case

Lobo, David Angelats; Ginestra, Paola

doi:10.3390/ma12234005

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the early 2000s, a new generation of industrial extrusion processes emerged, namely bioprinters [ 119 ]. The first applications included the development of vascular tissue networks to hold cells in culture [ 120 ] and the production of synthetic biocompatible cell carriers [ 121 ], later called scaffolds.…”

Section: Shaping By 3d Printing For Biomaterialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenge of 3D Bioprinting of Composite Natural Polymers PLA/Bioglass: Trends and Benefits in Cleft Palate Surgery

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cleft lip and palate is the fourth most common congenital malformation. Its prevalence is about 1 in 750 to 1 in 2000 live births. The consequences of this malformation are major: maxillary growth deficit, unaesthetic appearance, phonation disorders, difficulty in eating, and psycho-social disorders. Cleft palate repair establishes the division between the oral and nasal cavities. The alveolar bone graft is a key step. Different sites of autogenous bone harvesting are used, the most common being the iliac crest. Nevertheless, the large number of complications associated with harvesting has led to the use of substitute biomaterials. Bioactive glasses, discovered in 1969, are a group of synthetic silica-based materials with bone-bonding properties. Although 45S5 granular composition is commonly used in bone surgery to repair critical defects, it is only rarely used in the repair of cleft palates because this galenic form is only moderately adapted. However, advances in bone tissue engineering allow the shaping of three-dimensional scaffolds, which support colonization by host cells. Recent advances in computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) have even led to the 3D printing of scaffolds combining 45S5 bioglass with a natural and biocompatible poly-lactic acid matrix. The shape of the parts is customized and adapted to the particular shape of the critical bone defects. The objective of this literature review is to highlight the particularities of alveolar defects subsequent to facial clefts, then to detail the characteristics of the materials and technologies used to elaborate 3D matrices by bioprinting. Finally, we will explore research directions regarding their use in reconstructive surgery of cleft palates.

show abstract

Section: Shaping By 3d Printing For Biomaterialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenge of 3D Bioprinting of Composite Natural Polymers PLA/Bioglass: Trends and Benefits in Cleft Palate Surgery

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Longer life expectancy and increase in population will raise the volume of medical implantable devices, while the higher mobility demanded by younger patients may outlive such devices. This increase in demand is linked to the inherent complexity of the required implants that, paired with the differences between patients, makes their standardization difficult, originating the challenge to manufacture high-quality and different implantable devices [1,2]. Most of the current research on the design optimization of customized implants is focused on finding the optimal configuration to achieve the best performances in vivo [3][4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective Laser Melting and Electron Beam Melting of Ti6Al4V for Orthopedic Applications: A Comparative Study on the Applied Building Direction

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 3D printing process offers several advantages to the medical industry by producing complex and bespoke devices that accurately reproduce customized patient geometries. Despite the recent developments that strongly enhanced the dominance of additive manufacturing (AM) techniques over conventional methods, processes need to be continually optimized and controlled to obtain implants that can fulfill all the requirements of the surgical procedure and the anatomical district of interest. The best outcomes of an implant derive from optimal compromise and balance between a good interaction with the surrounding tissue through cell attachment and reduced inflammatory response mainly caused by a weak interface with the native tissue or bacteria colonization of the implant surface. For these reasons, the chemical, morphological, and mechanical properties of a device need to be designed in order to assure the best performances considering the in vivo environment components. In particular, complex 3D geometries can be produced with high dimensional accuracy but inadequate surface properties due to the layer manufacturing process that always entails the use of post-processing techniques to improve the surface quality, increasing the lead times of the whole process despite the reduction of the supply chain. The goal of this work was to provide a comparison between Ti6Al4V samples fabricated by selective laser melting (SLM) and electron beam melting (EBM) with different building directions in relation to the building plate. The results highlighted the influence of the process technique on osteoblast attachment and mineralization compared with the building orientation that showed a limited effect in promoting a proper osseointegration over a long-term period.

show abstract

“…The production of hybrid scaffolds, by the combination of two different 3D printing technologies [ 195 ], may also be helpful to reproduce more of the natural extracellular matrix, which may be applied to rebuild the cancer microenvironment in vitro. Therefore, not only are cancer bioprinting advances necessary, but studies not directly related to cancer bioprinting may also be modified to refine high resolution multi-material bioprinters [ 196 ], to accomplish more comprehension on tumor biology and targeted treatments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cancer Cell Direct Bioprinting: A Focused Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional printing technologies allow for the fabrication of complex parts with accurate geometry and less production time. When applied to biomedical applications, two different approaches, known as direct or indirect bioprinting, may be performed. The classical way is to print a support structure, the scaffold, and then culture the cells. Due to the low efficiency of this method, direct bioprinting has been proposed, with or without the use of scaffolds. Scaffolds are the most common technology to culture cells, but bioassembly of cells may be an interesting methodology to mimic the native microenvironment, the extracellular matrix, where the cells interact between themselves. The purpose of this review is to give an updated report about the materials, the bioprinting technologies, and the cells used in cancer research for breast, brain, lung, liver, reproductive, gastric, skin, and bladder associated cancers, to help the development of possible treatments to lower the mortality rates, increasing the effectiveness of guided therapies. This work introduces direct bioprinting to be considered as a key factor above the main tissue engineering technologies.

show abstract

Cell Bioprinting: The 3D-Bioplotter™ Case

Cited by 20 publications

References 96 publications

The Challenge of 3D Bioprinting of Composite Natural Polymers PLA/Bioglass: Trends and Benefits in Cleft Palate Surgery

The Challenge of 3D Bioprinting of Composite Natural Polymers PLA/Bioglass: Trends and Benefits in Cleft Palate Surgery

Selective Laser Melting and Electron Beam Melting of Ti6Al4V for Orthopedic Applications: A Comparative Study on the Applied Building Direction

Cancer Cell Direct Bioprinting: A Focused Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About