Optimization of gelatin–alginate composite bioink printability using rheological parameters: a systematic approach

Gao, Teng; Gillispie, Gregory J.; Copus, Joshua; Pr, Anil Kumar; Seol, Young-Joon; Atala, Anthony; Yoo, James J.; Lee, Sang Jin

doi:10.1088/1758-5090/aacdc7

Cited by 397 publications

(416 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

392

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…PCL Capa 6430 ( M w = 37 000 Da) is commonly used for MEW . PCL Capa 6500 ( M w = 50 000 Da) was selected for incorporation into a composite with SrBG with a composition of 46.13 SiO 2 , 2.60 P 2 O 5, 24.35 Na 2 O, 20.18 SrO, 6.73 CaO (mol%) processed into particles as previously described …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The limited availability of functional biomaterials which can be processed and fabricated into ordered micron‐fiber structures using MEW has hindered the development of potential new tissue substitutes. Since rheological behavior affects material extrusion rate, the aim of this article is to systematically apply a predictive framework for characterizing the influence of PCL and PCL/SrBG composite rheology on MEW extrusion behavior. This formulation framework directs the first MEW extrusion of high bioglass‐content micron‐fiber scaffolds, and can be applied to formulate and print future biomaterials.…”

Section: Power Law Coefficients (N K) Printing Parameters (∆P) Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rheological Characterization of Biomaterials Directs Additive Manufacturing of Strontium‐Substituted Bioactive Glass/Polycaprolactone Microfibers

Paxton

Ren

Ainsworth

et al. 2019

Macromol. Rapid Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additive manufacturing via melt electrowriting (MEW) can create ordered microfiber scaffolds relevant for bone tissue engineering; however, there remain limitations in the adoption of new printing materials, especially in MEW of biomaterials. For example, while promising composite formulations of polycaprolactone with strontium‐substituted bioactive glass have been processed into large or disordered fibres, from what is known, biologically‐relevant concentrations (>10 wt%) have never been printed into ordered microfibers using MEW. In this study, rheological characterization is used in combination with a predictive mathematical model to optimize biomaterial formulations and MEW conditions required to extrude various PCL and PCL/SrBG biomaterials to create ordered scaffolds. Previously, MEW printing of PCL/SrBG composites with 33 wt% glass required unachievable extrusion pressures. The composite formulation is modified using an evaporable solvent to reduce viscosity 100‐fold to fall within the predicted MEW pressure, temperature, and voltage tolerances, which enabled printing. This study reports the first fabrication of reproducible, ordered high‐content bioactive glass microfiber scaffolds by applying predictive modeling.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Power Law Coefficients (N K) Printing Parameters (∆P) Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rheological Characterization of Biomaterials Directs Additive Manufacturing of Strontium‐Substituted Bioactive Glass/Polycaprolactone Microfibers

Paxton

Ren

Ainsworth

et al. 2019

Macromol. Rapid Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alginate–gelatin bioinks have recently stimulated the field of 3D printing and bioprinting, leveraging robust, cell‐friendly, and facile fabrication of cell‐laden hydrogel constructs . Alginate–gelatin composites, wherein gelatin functions as a stabilizer, have been used for the 3D bioprinting of osteosarcoma (Saos‐2) cell‐laden scaffolds; however, the printed scaffolds did not promote cell proliferation .…”

Section: Gelatin–polysaccharides Composites In Cell Culture and Tissumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…207 The combination of gelatin and alginate has provided a platform to preserve cell function and survival within printed constructs, promoting the repair of lesions. 208 Alginate-gelatin bioinks have recently stimulated the field of 3D printing 209,210 and bioprinting, leveraging robust, cell-friendly, and facile fabrication of cell-laden hydrogel constructs. 211,212 Alginategelatin composites, wherein gelatin functions as a stabilizer, have been used for the 3D bioprinting of osteosarcoma (Saos-2) cell-laden scaffolds; however, the printed scaffolds did not promote cell proliferation.…”

Section: Gelatin-crosslinkable Alginatementioning

confidence: 99%

Gelatin‐polysaccharide composite scaffolds for 3D cell culture and tissue engineering: Towards natural therapeutics

Afewerki

Sheikhi

Kannan

et al. 2018

Bioengineering & Transla Med

309

210

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gelatin is a promising material as scaffold with therapeutic and regenerative characteristics due to its chemical similarities to the extracellular matrix (ECM) in the native tissues, biocompatibility, biodegradability, low antigenicity, cost‐effectiveness, abundance, and accessible functional groups that allow facile chemical modifications with other biomaterials or biomolecules. Despite the advantages of gelatin, poor mechanical properties, sensitivity to enzymatic degradation, high viscosity, and reduced solubility in concentrated aqueous media have limited its applications and encouraged the development of gelatin‐based composite hydrogels. The drawbacks of gelatin may be surmounted by synergistically combining it with a wide range of polysaccharides. The addition of polysaccharides to gelatin is advantageous in mimicking the ECM, which largely contains proteoglycans or glycoproteins. Moreover, gelatin–polysaccharide biomaterials benefit from mechanical resilience, high stability, low thermal expansion, improved hydrophilicity, biocompatibility, antimicrobial and anti‐inflammatory properties, and wound healing potential. Here, we discuss how combining gelatin and polysaccharides provides a promising approach for developing superior therapeutic biomaterials. We review gelatin–polysaccharides scaffolds and their applications in cell culture and tissue engineering, providing an outlook for the future of this family of biomaterials as advanced natural therapeutics.

show abstract

“…There are several examples of more systematic approaches to the bioprinting optimization process which can serve as a useful entry point for the specific application. However, some of these methods focus mostly or only on printability of the material, not taking the possible biological applications into account [13–15]. Moreover, 3D bioprinting should be viewed through the prism of an additional dimension, namely time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimization of 3D bioprinting of human neuroblastoma cells using sodium alginate hydrogel

Lewicki

Bergman

Kerins

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2627 Abbreviations: FRESH, freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels; POI, 28 parameter optimization index; SA, sodium alginate; 2 29 Abstract 30 There are many parameters in extrusion-based three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting of 31 different materials that require fine-tuning to obtain the optimal print resolution and cell 32 viability. To standardize this process, methods such as parameter optimization index (POI) 33 have been introduced. The POI aims at pinpointing the optimal printing speed and pressure 34 to achieve the highest accuracy keeping theoretical shear stress low. Here we applied the 35 POI to optimize the process of 3D bioprinting human neuroblastoma cell-laden 2% sodium 36 alginate (SA) hydrogel using freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels (FRESH).37 Our results demonstrate a notable difference between optimal parameters for printing 2% 38 SA with and without cells in the hydrogel. We also detected a significant influence of long-39 term cell culture on the printed constructs. This observation suggests that the POI has to be 40 evaluated in the perspective of the final application. When taking these conditions into 41 consideration, we could define a set of parameters that resulted in good quality prints 42 maintaining high neuroblastoma cell viability (83% viable cells) during 7 days of cell culture 43 using 2% SA and FRESH bioprinting. These results can be further used to manufacture 44 neuroblastoma in vitro 3D culture systems to be used for cancer research. 45 3 46 2. Introduction 4748 Stem cell and tumor biology allow for the generation of small organ-like or tumor-like 49 structures to be developed in vitro, and this holds great promise for significant improvement 50 of approaches in drug discovery and precision medicine. Bioprinting has emerged as an 51 important tool for improving the conditions and control of such cell culture rationale [1,2].52 However, to achieve optimal results, many parameters of the microenvironment must be 53 taken into account. We and others have demonstrated the significance of, e.g., oxygen levels 54 [3,4], substrate stiffness [5,6], substrate roughness [7], and biomaterial properties [8] for 55 progenitor cells to respond properly to external signaling factors such as growth factors, and 56 to execute the appropriate transcriptional programs. Yet, 2-dimensional cell culture is in 57 itself a limiting factor both in stem cell and tumor biology and it has been shown that, for 58 example, certain tumor cells grown in 2D conditions are more sensitive to chemotherapeutic 59 reagents than when grown in three dimensions [9], which may explain some of the lack of 60 progress in cancer research heavily debated during recent years [10,11]. 6162 Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting was first reported to deposit viable cells by Smith et al in 63 2004 [12]. More than a decade later, 3D bioprinting is constantly being improved in terms of 64 hardware, software, biomaterials, and applications. Standard 3D extrusion-based 65 bioprinters, despite being ...

show abstract

Optimization of gelatin–alginate composite bioink printability using rheological parameters: a systematic approach

Cited by 397 publications

References 29 publications

Rheological Characterization of Biomaterials Directs Additive Manufacturing of Strontium‐Substituted Bioactive Glass/Polycaprolactone Microfibers

Rheological Characterization of Biomaterials Directs Additive Manufacturing of Strontium‐Substituted Bioactive Glass/Polycaprolactone Microfibers

Gelatin‐polysaccharide composite scaffolds for 3D cell culture and tissue engineering: Towards natural therapeutics

Optimization of 3D bioprinting of human neuroblastoma cells using sodium alginate hydrogel

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About