China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Two-Dimensional Nanomaterials for Drug Delivery in Regenerative Medicine
Published in Harishkumar Madhyastha, Durgesh Nandini Chauhan, Nanopharmaceuticals in Regenerative Medicine, 2022
Zahra Mohammadpour, Seyed Morteza Naghib
Orrefo’s group conducted active research towards advanced biofabrication approaches. To this end, they developed cell compatible bioinks by the inclusion of Laponite into various biomaterials to achieve bioactive cell-laden constructs for skeletal tissue regeneration (Cidonio et al. 2019a; Cidonio et al. 2019b; 2020). In one report, gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) was mixed with Laponite and turned into a cell supportive structure by extrusion-based 3D bioprinting (Cidonio et al. 2019b). They observed higher drug localisation in the porous structure of Laponite-GelMA rather than GelMA. The characteristic was attributed to Laponite. Furthermore, the addition of Laponite up to an optimised concentration improved the quality of the bioprinted scaffold. Cell viability and proliferation were assessed by encapsulation of human bone marrow stromal cells into the 3D platform. Unlike the GelMA controls, cells that were encapsulated into Laponite-GelMA consistently proliferated over 21 days. Osteogenic differentiation of the stem cells localised in the Laponite-GelMA scaffold was visualised by alizarin red staining. Interestingly, even in the absence of full osteogenic media (without dexamethasone), mineralisation areas appeared. Laponite-GelMA hydrogel discs that were loaded with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were implanted in a chick CAM model. Compared with other controls, extensive integration and vascularisation was observed for Laponite-GelMA-VEGF. Increased drug loading and retention in the Laponite structure accounted for better ex vivo performance of the scaffold.
Injectable Scaffolds for Oral Tissue Regeneration
Published in Vincenzo Guarino, Marco Antonio Alvarez-Pérez, Current Advances in Oral and Craniofacial Tissue Engineering, 2020
J.L. Suárez-Franco, B.I. Cerda-Cristerna
Recently, several methods have been developed to spatially encode local properties to 3D materials-based culture systems, and these methods are generically referred to as 3D biofabrication techniques. Such procedures are capable of either constructing or patterning materials, with a high degree of control, by finely tuning and defining material geometries, localization of biomolecular cues, and/or mechanical properties. In doing so, they have created complex material geometries to resemble endogenous tissues. Similarly, biofabrication-based patterning techniques have immobilized controlled concentrations of adhesive ligands, growth factors, or other signaling molecules to mimic cellular architectures in vivo. By enabling this precise control over local and bulk material properties, these methods can create new biomaterials that better replicate the complex and heterogeneous nature of endogenous tissues and organs. This will help to elucidate the gap between the state of tissue engineering and the unrealized hope of true artificial organs and tissues. In addition, this level of control could allow for a more complete model of cancerous or diseased states in cells and tissues to assess current or develop new, therapeutic strategies (Bajaj et al. 2014).
Emerging technologies for combating pandemics
Published in Expert Review of Medical Devices, 2022
Edward Weaver, Shahid Uddin, Dimitrios A. Lamprou
Biofabrication entails the construction of objects and systems using biological materials [15]. Often associated with tissue engineering (TE) and regenerative medicine (RM), biofabrication marks a pivotal step toward understanding the synthesis of biological systems from raw materials in a ‘bottom-up’ approach. Whilst biofabrication and bioprinting are technically separate entities, their use within literature overlaps to the point where they are often used interchangeably [15]. Biofabrication is associated with AM via the use of bioprinters, to print cells and tissues for the purpose of drug discovery, tissue research and tissue/organ transplantation. For the treatment of covid-19, a disease which primarily affects the respiratory system, biofabricated 3D lung models were proposed to assist in identifying drug targets relevant for 3D printing [16]. Alternative forms of biofabrication that exist are solvent casting, freeze-drying (lyophilization), and electrospinning scaffolds (Figure 2) [17]. Biofabrication helps reduce the need for experiments on living animals by providing a more accurate environment in a laboratory setting than what is achievable with simple cell cultures.
Can 4D bioprinting revolutionize drug development?
Published in Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery, 2019
Izeia Lukin, Saioa Musquiz, Itsasne Erezuma, Taleb H. Al-Tel, Nasim Golafshan, Alireza Dolatshahi-Pirouz, Gorka Orive
3D bioprinting is based on the combination of additive manufacturing with living organism and biomaterials to produce static composite structures [6], whereas 4D bioprinting can be described as an emerging approach, where previously designed 3D configuration is integrated with ‘time’ as a four dimension [7,8]. From the most rigid and static 3D structures, scientists now are able to fabricate constructs that have the ability to change their shape in response to different stimuli including temperature, swelling behavior, pH, Ca2+ concentration, humidity, electric-field, light or magnetic-field among others [9,10] (Figure 1), leading to a new era in tissue engineering but also in other biomedical fields like bioactuation, biorobotics and biosensing. Biofabrication is defined as ‘the automated generation of biologically functional products with structural organization from living cells, bioactive molecules, biomaterials, cell aggregates such as microtissues, hybrid cell-material constructs through bioprinting or bioassembly’ [11]. Biofabrication is based on 3 main manufacturing principles including subtractive (lithography), formative (drying in wells) and additive manufacturing; being the latter the best way for biofabrication as it provides faster response, enables the tissue engineers to make complex structures, and leads to higher automation capability and reproduction [12]. As 4D bioprinting is a way of biofabrication, it also uses the 3 manufacturing principles above mentioned.
Developments with 3D bioprinting for novel drug discovery
Published in Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery, 2018
Aishwarya Satpathy, Pallab Datta, Yang Wu, Bugra Ayan, Ertugrul Bayram, Ibrahim T. Ozbolat
Compared to any other biofabrication methods (such as hanging drop, micro-well, micro-patterned matrices, microfluidics, acoustic force, and magnetic force-based techniques), 3D bioprinting offers the ability to precisely position multiple cell types as per tissue design. Depositing multiple cell types offers the opportunity to fabricate a 3D construct considering coculture and vascularization possibilities. The complex spatial positioning is also complimented with versatility to process several materials. It also provides the added benefit of increased cell–matrix interactions, ensuring the viability of cells for a longer period of time. Bioprinting is also a high-throughput, scalable, highly reproducible, and automated technique compared to other biofabrication techniques. The high-throughput fabrication advantage of bioprinting for generating spheroids has been demonstrated in recent studies [60,61]. Bioprinted constructs can be easily perfused, which is a critical requirement for conducting drug screening. Additionally, increasing emphasis is directed toward the generation of personalized diseased models for patient-specific drug discovery and therapeutic planning [62]. In this direction, bioprinting has shown potential especially with the use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) as cell component, although demonstration of completely functional tissue made of bioprinted iPSCs still remains to be performed [63]. Considering these advantages, several in vitro models for drug testing have been fabricated as summarized in Table 1 and detailed below.