scholarly journals Bioprinting of 3D Functional Tissue Constructs

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 395
Author(s):  
Jiankang He ◽  
Mao Mao ◽  
Xiao Li ◽  
Chee Kai Chua
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 915-946 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Selcan Gungor-Ozkerim ◽  
Ilyas Inci ◽  
Yu Shrike Zhang ◽  
Ali Khademhosseini ◽  
Mehmet Remzi Dokmeci

Bioprinting is an emerging technology with various applications in making functional tissue constructs to replace injured or diseased tissues. In all bioprinting strategies, the bioinks are an essential component. We provide an in-depth discussion of the different bioinks currently employed for bioprinting, and outline some future perspectives in their further development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hun-Jin Jeong ◽  
Hyoryung Nam ◽  
Jinah Jang ◽  
Seung-Jae Lee

It is difficult to fabricate tubular-shaped tissues and organs (e.g., trachea, blood vessel, and esophagus tissue) with traditional biofabrication techniques (e.g., electrospinning, cell-sheet engineering, and mold-casting) because these have complicated multiple processes. In addition, the tubular-shaped tissues and organs have their own design with target-specific mechanical and biological properties. Therefore, the customized geometrical and physiological environment is required as one of the most critical factors for functional tissue regeneration. 3D bioprinting technology has been receiving attention for the fabrication of patient-tailored and complex-shaped free-form architecture with high reproducibility and versatility. Printable biocomposite inks that can facilitate to build tissue constructs with polymeric frameworks and biochemical microenvironmental cues are also being actively developed for the reconstruction of functional tissue. In this review, we delineated the state-of-the-art of 3D bioprinting techniques specifically for tubular tissue and organ regeneration. In addition, this review described biocomposite inks, such as natural and synthetic polymers. Several described engineering approaches using 3D bioprinting techniques and biocomposite inks may offer beneficial characteristics for the physiological mimicry of human tubular tissues and organs.


2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 170-182
Author(s):  
Dan Xing ◽  
Wei Liu ◽  
Jiao Jiao Li ◽  
Longwei Liu ◽  
Anqi Guo ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Xiufang Li ◽  
Renchuan You ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Shuqin Yan ◽  
Zuwei Luo ◽  
...  

Tissue engineering aims to generate functional tissue constructs with the necessary scaffold properties for cell colonization and the establishment of a vascular network. However, treatment of tissue defects using synthetic...


Biosensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Ferrari ◽  
Cecilia Palma ◽  
Simone Vesentini ◽  
Paola Occhetta ◽  
Marco Rasponi

Organs-on-chip (OoC), often referred to as microphysiological systems (MPS), are advanced in vitro tools able to replicate essential functions of human organs. Owing to their unprecedented ability to recapitulate key features of the native cellular environments, they represent promising tools for tissue engineering and drug screening applications. The achievement of proper functionalities within OoC is crucial; to this purpose, several parameters (e.g., chemical, physical) need to be assessed. Currently, most approaches rely on off-chip analysis and imaging techniques. However, the urgent demand for continuous, noninvasive, and real-time monitoring of tissue constructs requires the direct integration of biosensors. In this review, we focus on recent strategies to miniaturize and embed biosensing systems into organs-on-chip platforms. Biosensors for monitoring biological models with metabolic activities, models with tissue barrier functions, as well as models with electromechanical properties will be described and critically evaluated. In addition, multisensor integration within multiorgan platforms will be further reviewed and discussed.


Processes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 915
Author(s):  
Gözde Dursun ◽  
Muhammad Umer ◽  
Bernd Markert ◽  
Marcus Stoffel

(1) Background: Bioreactors mimic the natural environment of cells and tissues by providing a controlled micro-environment. However, their design is often expensive and complex. Herein, we have introduced the development of a low-cost compression bioreactor which enables the application of different mechanical stimulation regimes to in vitro tissue models and provides the information of applied stress and strain in real-time. (2) Methods: The compression bioreactor is designed using a mini-computer called Raspberry Pi, which is programmed to apply compressive deformation at various strains and frequencies, as well as to measure the force applied to the tissue constructs. Besides this, we have developed a mobile application connected to the bioreactor software to monitor, command, and control experiments via mobile devices. (3) Results: Cell viability results indicate that the newly designed compression bioreactor supports cell cultivation in a sterile environment without any contamination. The developed bioreactor software plots the experimental data of dynamic mechanical loading in a long-term manner, as well as stores them for further data processing. Following in vitro uniaxial compression conditioning of 3D in vitro cartilage models, chondrocyte cell migration was altered positively compared to static cultures. (4) Conclusion: The developed compression bioreactor can support the in vitro tissue model cultivation and monitor the experimental information with a low-cost controlling system and via mobile application. The highly customizable mold inside the cultivation chamber is a significant approach to solve the limited customization capability of the traditional bioreactors. Most importantly, the compression bioreactor prevents operator- and system-dependent variability between experiments by enabling a dynamic culture in a large volume for multiple numbers of in vitro tissue constructs.


Biomaterials ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (25) ◽  
pp. 5773-5781 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nandana Bhardwaj ◽  
Quynhhoa T. Nguyen ◽  
Albert C. Chen ◽  
David L. Kaplan ◽  
Robert L. Sah ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. S47
Author(s):  
Rowena McBeath ◽  
Richard W. Edwards ◽  
Robert L. Mauck ◽  
Irving Shapiro ◽  
A. Lee Osterman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document