4.6 Article

A synergistic approach to the design, fabrication and evaluation of 3D printed micro and nano featured scaffolds for vascularized bone tissue repair

期刊

NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 27, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0957-4484/27/6/064001

关键词

3D printing; vascularized bone; nanomaterials; perfusable channel; stem cells; endothelial cells

资金

  1. NIH [1DP2EB020549-01]
  2. GW Institute for Biomedical Engineering Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

3D bioprinting has begun to show great promise in advancing the development of functional tissue/organ replacements. However, to realize the true potential of 3D bioprinted tissues for clinical use requires the fabrication of an interconnected and effective vascular network. Solving this challenge is critical, as human tissue relies on an adequate network of blood vessels to transport oxygen, nutrients, other chemicals, biological factors and waste, in and out of the tissue. Here, we have successfully designed and printed a series of novel 3D bone scaffolds with both bone formation supporting structures and highly interconnected 3D microvascular mimicking channels, for efficient and enhanced osteogenic bone regeneration as well as vascular cell growth. Using a chemical functionalization process, we have conjugated our samples with nano hydroxyapatite (nHA), for the creation of novel micro and nano featured devices for vascularized bone growth. We evaluated our scaffolds with mechanical testing, hydrodynamic measurements and in vitro human mesenchymal stem cell (hMSC) adhesion (4 h), proliferation (1, 3 and 5 d) and osteogenic differentiation (1, 2 and 3 weeks). These tests confirmed bone-like physical properties and vascular-like flow profiles, as well as demonstrated enhanced hMSC adhesion, proliferation and osteogenic differentiation. Additional in vitro experiments with human umbilical vein endothelial cells also demonstrated improved vascular cell growth, migration and organization on micro-nano featured scaffolds.

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

4.6
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