Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Agarwal T, Chiesa I, Presutti D, Irawan V, Vajanthri KY, Costantini M, et al.
    Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 2021 Apr;123:112005.
    PMID: 33812625 DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2021.112005
    Inadequate self-repair and regenerative efficiency of the cartilage tissues has motivated the researchers to devise advanced and effective strategies to resolve this issue. Introduction of bioprinting to tissue engineering has paved the way for fabricating complex biomimetic engineered constructs. In this context, the current review gears off with the discussion of standard and advanced 3D/4D printing technologies and their implications for the repair of different cartilage tissues, namely, articular, meniscal, nasoseptal, auricular, costal, and tracheal cartilage. The review is then directed towards highlighting the current stem cell opportunities. On a concluding note, associated critical issues and prospects for future developments, particularly in this sphere of personalized medicines have been discussed.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting*
  2. Raees S, Ullah F, Javed F, Akil HM, Jadoon Khan M, Safdar M, et al.
    Int J Biol Macromol, 2023 Mar 31;232:123476.
    PMID: 36731696 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.123476
    With the advancement in 3D bioprinting technology, cell culture methods can design 3D environments which are both, complex and physiologically relevant. The main component in 3D bioprinting, bioink, can be split into various categories depending on the criterion of categorization. Although the choice of bioink and bioprinting process will vary greatly depending on the application, general features such as material properties, biological interaction, gelation, and viscosity are always important to consider. The foundation of 3D bioprinting is the exact layer-by-layer implantation of biological elements, biochemicals, and living cells with the spatial control of the implantation of functional elements onto the biofabricated 3D structure. Three basic strategies underlie the 3D bioprinting process: autonomous self-assembly, micro tissue building blocks, and biomimicry or biomimetics. Tissue engineering can benefit from 3D bioprinting in many ways, but there are still numerous obstacles to overcome before functional tissues can be produced and used in clinical settings. A better comprehension of the physiological characteristics of bioink materials and a higher level of ability to reproduce the intricate biologically mimicked and physiologically relevant 3D structures would be a significant improvement for 3D bioprinting to overcome the limitations.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting*
  3. Mohd N, Razali M, Fauzi MB, Abu Kasim NH
    Int J Mol Sci, 2023 Aug 17;24(16).
    PMID: 37629064 DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612881
    Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a unique combination of technological advances in 3D printing and tissue engineering. It has emerged as a promising approach to address the dilemma in current dental treatments faced by clinicians in order to repair or replace injured and diseased tissues. The exploration of 3D bioprinting technology provides high reproducibility and precise control of the bioink containing the desired cells and biomaterial over the architectural and dimensional features of the scaffolds in fabricating functional tissue constructs that are specific to the patient treatment need. In recent years, the dental applications of different 3D bioprinting techniques, types of novel bioinks, and the types of cells used have been extensively explored. Most of the findings noted significant challenges compared to the non-biological 3D printing approach in constructing the bioscaffolds that mimic native tissues. Hence, this review focuses solely on the implementation of 3D bioprinting techniques and strategies based on cell-laden bioinks. It discusses the in vitro applications of 3D-bioprinted scaffolds on cell viabilities, cell functionalities, differentiation ability, and expression of the markers as well as the in vivo evaluations of the implanted bioscaffolds on the animal models for bone, periodontal, dentin, and pulp tissue regeneration. Finally, it outlines some perspectives for future developments in dental applications.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting*
  4. Ashammakhi N, Ahadian S, Zengjie F, Suthiwanich K, Lorestani F, Orive G, et al.
    Biotechnol J, 2018 Dec;13(12):e1800148.
    PMID: 30221837 DOI: 10.1002/biot.201800148
    Three-dimensionally printed constructs are static and do not recapitulate the dynamic nature of tissues. Four-dimensional (4D) bioprinting has emerged to include conformational changes in printed structures in a predetermined fashion using stimuli-responsive biomaterials and/or cells. The ability to make such dynamic constructs would enable an individual to fabricate tissue structures that can undergo morphological changes. Furthermore, other fields (bioactuation, biorobotics, and biosensing) will benefit from developments in 4D bioprinting. Here, the authors discuss stimuli-responsive biomaterials as potential bioinks for 4D bioprinting. Natural cell forces can also be incorporated into 4D bioprinted structures. The authors introduce mathematical modeling to predict the transition and final state of 4D printed constructs. Different potential applications of 4D bioprinting are also described. Finally, the authors highlight future perspectives for this emerging technology in biomedicine.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting/trends*
  5. Masri S, Fauzi MB
    Polymers (Basel), 2021 Mar 25;13(7).
    PMID: 33805995 DOI: 10.3390/polym13071011
    Skin tissue engineering aimed to replace chronic tissue injury commonly occurred due to severe burn and chronic wound in diabetic ulcer patients. The normal skin is unable to be regenerated until the seriously injured tissue is disrupted and losing its function. 3D-bioprinting has been one of the effective methods for scaffold fabrication and is proven to replace the conventional method, which reported several drawbacks. In light of this, researchers have developed a new fabrication approach via 3D-bioprinting by combining biomaterials (bioinks) with cells and biomolecules followed by a suitable crosslinking approach. This advanced technology has been subcategorised into three different printing techniques including inject-based, laser-based, and extrusion-based printing. However, the printable quality of the currently available bioinks demonstrated shortcomings in the physicochemical and mechanical properties. This review aims to identify the limitations raised by using natural-based bioinks and the optimum temperature for various applied printing techniques. It is essential to ensure maintaining the acceptable printed scaffold property such as the optimum pore sizes and porosity that allow cell migration activity. In addition, the properties required for an ideal bioinks design for better scaffold printability were also summarised.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting
  6. Hussin MSF, Mohd Serah A, Azlan KA, Abdullah HZ, Idris MI, Ghazali I, et al.
    Polymers (Basel), 2021 Feb 22;13(4).
    PMID: 33671617 DOI: 10.3390/polym13040647
    Collecting information from previous investigations and expressing it in a scientometrics study can be a priceless guide to getting a complete overview of a specific research area. The aim of this study is to explore the interrelated connection between alginate, gelatine, and hydroxyapatite within the scope of bone tissue and scaffold. A review of traditional literature with data mining procedures using bibliometric analyses was considered to identify the evolution of the selected research area between 2009 and 2019. Bibliometric methods and knowledge visualization technologies were implemented to investigate diverse publications based on the following indicators: year of publication, document type, language, country, institution, author, journal, keyword, and number of citations. An analysis using a bibliometric study found that 7446 papers were located with the keywords "bone tissue" and "scaffold", and 1767 (alginate), 185 (gelatine), 5658 (hydroxyapatite) papers with those specific sub keywords. The number of publications that relate to "tissue engineering" and bone more than doubled between 2009 (1352) and 2019 (2839). China, the United States and India are the most productive countries, while Sichuan University and the Chinese Academy of Science from China are the most important institutions related to bone tissue scaffold. Materials Science and Engineering C is the most productive journal, followed by the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A. This paper is a starting point, providing the first bibliometric analysis study of bone tissue and scaffold considering alginate, gelatine and hydroxyapatite. A bibliometric analysis would greatly assist in giving a scientific insight to support desired future research work, not only associated with bone tissue engineering applications. It is expected that the analysis of alginate, gelatine and hydroxyapatite in terms of 3D bioprinting, clinical outcomes, scaffold architecture, and the regenerative medicine approach will enhance the research into bone tissue engineering in the near future. Continued studies into these research fields are highly recommended.
    Matched MeSH terms: Bioprinting
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links