4.7 Review

3D-printed Bioreactors for In Vitro Modeling and Analysis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOPRINTING
Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages 80-95

Publisher

WHIOCE PUBLISHING PTE LTD, SINGAPORE
DOI: 10.18063/ijb.v6i4.267

Keywords

Cell culture; Bacteria; Three-dimensional-printed chip; Three-dimensional-printed devices; Three-dimensional-printed bioreactors

Funding

  1. HP-NTU Digital Manufacturing Corporate Lab, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
  2. Singapore Government through the Industry Alignment Fund-Industry Collaboration Projects Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, three-dimensional (3D) printing has markedly enhanced the functionality of bioreactors by offering the capability of manufacturing intricate architectures, which changes the way of conducting in vitro biomodeling and bioanalysis. As 3D-printing technologies become increasingly mature, the architecture of 3D-printed bioreactors can be tailored to specific applications using different printing approaches to create an optimal environment for bioreactions. Multiple functional components have been combined into a single bioreactor fabricated by 3D-printing, and this fully functional integrated bioreactor outperforms traditional methods. Notably, several 3D-printed bioreactors systems have demonstrated improved performance in tissue engineering and drug screening due to their 3D cell culture microenvironment with precise spatial control and biological compatibility. Moreover, many microbial bioreactors have also been proposed to address the problems concerning pathogen detection, biofouling, and diagnosis of infectious diseases. This review offers a reasonably comprehensive review of 3D-printed bioreactors for in vitro biological applications. We compare the functions of bioreactors fabricated by various 3D-printing modalities and highlight the benefit of 3D-printed bioreactors compared to traditional methods.

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