4.7 Article

A Multimodal Stimulation Cell Culture Bioreactor for Tissue Engineering: A Numerical Modelling Approach

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym12040940

关键词

cylindrical perfusion bioreactor; multimodal stimulation; cytotoxicity study; material characterization; bone tissue engineering; finite element analysis; electrical stimulation

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT)
  2. Centro2020 [UIDP/04044/2020]
  3. PAMI-ROTEIRO/0328/2013 [022158]
  4. Stimuli2BioScaffold-Stimuli modelling for BioScaffolds
  5. COMPETE2020 under the PT2020 programme
  6. FCT [02/SAICT/2017, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-032554, 31146]
  7. Bone2Move-Development of in vivo experimental techniques and modeling methodologies
  8. MATIS-MATERIALS AND SUSTAINABLE INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES [CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-000014-3362]
  9. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal [UIDB/00645/2020]
  10. [UID/BIO/04565/2020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of digital twins in tissue engineering (TE) applications is of paramount importance to reduce the number of in vitro and in vivo tests. To pursue this aim, a novel multimodal bioreactor is developed, combining 3D design with numerical stimulation. This approach will facilitate the reproducibility between studies and the platforms optimisation (physical and digital) to enhance TE. The new bioreactor was specifically designed to be additive manufactured, which could not be reproduced with conventional techniques. Specifically, the design suggested allows the application of dual stimulation (electrical and mechanical) of a scaffold cell culture. For the selection of the most appropriate material for bioreactor manufacturing several materials were assessed for their cytotoxicity. Numerical modelling methods were then applied to the new bioreactor using one of the most appropriate material (Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol-modified (PETG)) to find the optimal stimulation input parameters for bone TE based on two reported in vitro studies.

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

4.7
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