Parameter optimization for 3D bioprinting of hydrogels

Webb, Braeden; Doyle, Barry

doi:10.1016/j.bprint.2017.09.001

Cited by 138 publications

(127 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, alginatebased hydrogels have been shown to be most effective at 37 • C due to: accurate extrusion flow rate, decreased occurrence of obstruction and compatibility with cell viability (Ding et al, 2018). One study showed that for a 7% alginate/8% gelatin hydrogel, optimum printing parameters at 37 • C are as follows: nozzle gauge = 30 G, printing pressure = 100 kPa, and printing speed = 4 mm/s (Webb and Doyle, 2017). Storage of alginate can be vast depending upon purpose; for example, cells encapsulated with alginate can be stored comfortably between 0 and 30 • C and are fit for purpose, whereas it has been shown that in an alginate/gelatin hydrogel, storage at 3 • C prolonged degradation when compared to storage at 37 • C (Giuseppe et al, 2018).…”

Section: Plant-derived Biomaterials Alginatementioning

confidence: 99%

Plant-Derived Biomaterials: A Review of 3D Bioprinting and Biomedical Applications

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pursuit of appropriate, biocompatible materials is one of the primary challenges in translational bioprinting. The requirement to refine a biomaterial into a bioink places additional demands on the criteria for candidate biomaterials. The material must enable extrusion as a liquid bioink and yet be capable of maintaining its shape in the post-printing phase to yield viable tissues, organs and biological materials. Plant-derived biomaterials show great promise in harnessing both the natural strength of plant microarchitecture combined with their natural biological roles as supporters of cell growth. The aim of this review article is to outline the most widely used biomaterials derived from land plants and marine algae: nanocellulose, pectin, starch, alginate, agarose, fucoidan, and carrageenan, with an in-depth focus on nanocellulose and alginate. The properties that render these materials as promising bioinks for three dimensional bioprinting is herein discussed alongside their potential in 3D bioprinting for tissue engineering, drug delivery, wound healing, and implantable medical devices.

show abstract

Section: Plant-derived Biomaterials Alginatementioning

confidence: 99%

Plant-Derived Biomaterials: A Review of 3D Bioprinting and Biomedical Applications

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, definite trends of decreasing strand width with increasing linear print speed were shown in a few studies. [26][27][28] Notably, Webb and Doyle further quantified the layer-level printability through varying the linear print speed, pressure, and needle diameter to assess the strand width of the created paths. 27 They observed that strand width was correlated with pressure, and negatively correlated with linear print speed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[26][27][28] Notably, Webb and Doyle further quantified the layer-level printability through varying the linear print speed, pressure, and needle diameter to assess the strand width of the created paths. 27 They observed that strand width was correlated with pressure, and negatively correlated with linear print speed. In addition, Webb and Doyle 27 note that at high pressures, changes in linear print speed have a more dramatic effect on strand width, whereas, at lower pressures, the print speed has a largely linear and directly proportional relationship with strand width.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process–Structure–Quality Relationships of Three-Dimensional Printed Poly(Caprolactone)-Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds

Gerdes

Mostafavi

Ramesh

et al. 2020

Tissue Engineering Part A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone defects are common and, in many cases, challenging to treat. Tissue engineering is an interdisciplinary approach with promising potential for treating bone defects. Within tissue engineering, three-dimensional (3D) printing strategies have emerged as potent tools for scaffold fabrication. However, reproducibility and quality control are critical aspects limiting the translation of 3D printed scaffolds to clinical use, which remain to be addressed. To elucidate the factors that yield to the generation of defects in bioprinting and to achieve reproducible biomaterial printing, the objective of this article is to frame a systematic approach for optimizing and validating 3D printing of poly(caprolactone) (PCL)-hydroxyapatite (HAp) composite scaffolds. We delineate the effect of PCL-to-HAp ratio, print velocity, print temperature, and extrusion pressure on the architectural and mechanical properties of the 3D printed scaffold. Furthermore, we present an in situ image-based monitoring approach to quantify key quality-related aspects of constructs, such as the ability to deposit material consistently and print elementary shapes with fewer flaws. Our results show that small defects generated during the printing process have a significant role in lowering the mechanical properties of 3D printed polymeric scaffolds. In addition, the in vitro osteoinductivity of the fabricated scaffolds is demonstrated.

show abstract

“…FRESH uses a gelatin slurry for physical support during the printing process and calcium coordination of alginate monomers. To further achieve the highest printing resolution and maximize cell viability, we combined the FRESH approach with an application of the printing optimization index (POI) method [14]. The aim of the POI is to find a set of printing parameters, including a nozzle size, printing speed and pressure, that will result in high accuracy of the printed construct, maintaining low theoretical shear stress (TSS) at the same 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

Parameter optimization for 3D bioprinting of hydrogels

Cited by 138 publications

References 7 publications

Plant-Derived Biomaterials: A Review of 3D Bioprinting and Biomedical Applications

Plant-Derived Biomaterials: A Review of 3D Bioprinting and Biomedical Applications

Process–Structure–Quality Relationships of Three-Dimensional Printed Poly(Caprolactone)-Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About