4.8 Review

Progress in 3D bioprinting technology for tissue/organ regenerative engineering

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 226, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119536

关键词

Tissue engineering; Regenerative engineering; Artificial tissues; Three-dimensional; Bioprinting; Bioinks

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Escalating cases of organ shortage and donor scarcity worldwide are alarming reminders of the need for alternatives to allograft tissues. Within the last three decades, research efforts in the field of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering continue to address the urunet need for artificial tissues and organs for transplant. Work in the field has evolved to create what we consider a new field, Regenerative Engineering, defined as the Convergence of advanced materials science, stem cell science, physics, developmental biology and clinical translation towards the regeneration of complex tissues and organ systems. Included in the regenerative engineering paradigm is advanced manufacturing. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a promising and innovative biofabrication strategy to precisely position biologics, including living cells and extracellular matrix (ECM) components, in the prescribed 3D hierarchal organization to create artificial multi-cellular tissues/organs. In this review, we outline recent progress in several bioprinting technologies used to engineer scaffolds with requisite mechanical, structural, and biological complexity. We examine the process parameters affecting bioprinting and bioink-biomaterials and review notable studies on bioprinted skin, cardiac, bone, cartilage, liver, lung, neural, and pancreatic tissue. We also focus on other 3D bioprinting application areas including cancer research, drug testing, high-throughput screening (HTS), and organ-on-a-chip models. We also highlight the current challenges associated with the clinical translation of 3D bioprinting and conclude with the future perspective of bioprinting technology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据