4.7 Article

Rapid 3D printing of anatomically accurate and mechanically heterogeneous aortic valve hydrogel scaffolds

Journal

BIOFABRICATION
Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1758-5082/4/3/035005

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Morgan Family Foundation
  2. Hartwell Foundation
  3. National Science Foundation [CBET-0955172]
  4. NSF
  5. American Heart Association [AH0830384N]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aortic valve exhibits complex three-dimensional (3D) anatomy and heterogeneity essential for the long-term efficient biomechanical function. These are, however, challenging to mimic in de novo engineered living tissue valve strategies. We present a novel simultaneous 3D printing/photocrosslinking technique for rapidly engineering complex, heterogeneous aortic valve scaffolds. Native anatomic and axisymmetric aortic valve geometries (root wall and tri-leaflets) with 12-22 mm inner diameters (ID) were 3D printed with poly-ethylene glycol-diacrylate (PEG-DA) hydrogels (700 or 8000 MW) supplemented with alginate. 3D printing geometric accuracy was quantified and compared using Micro-CT. Porcine aortic valve interstitial cells (PAVIC) seeded scaffolds were cultured for up to 21 days. Results showed that blended PEG-DA scaffolds could achieve over tenfold range in elastic modulus (5.3 +/- 0.9 to 74.6 +/- 1.5 kPa). 3D printing times for valve conduits with mechanically contrasting hydrogels were optimized to 14 to 45 min, increasing linearly with conduit diameter. Larger printed valves had greater shape fidelity (93.3 +/- 2.6, 85.1 +/- 2.0 and 73.3 +/- 5.2% for 22, 17 and 12 mm ID porcine valves; 89.1 +/- 4.0, 84.1 +/- 5.6 and 66.6 +/- 5.2% for simplified valves). PAVIC seeded scaffolds maintained near 100% viability over 21 days. These results demonstrate that 3D hydrogel printing with controlled photocrosslinking can rapidly fabricate anatomical heterogeneous valve conduits that support cell engraftment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available