4.2 Article

In Situ Printing of Adhesive Hydrogel Scaffolds for the Treatment of Skeletal Muscle Injuries

期刊

ACS APPLIED BIO MATERIALS
卷 3, 期 3, 页码 1568-1579

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.9b01176

关键词

in situ printing; bioinks; adhesive hydrogels; gelatin methacryloyl; skeletal muscle injury

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM126831, AR073822]
  2. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  3. Nebraska Tobacco Settlement Biomedical Research Enhancement Funds
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) [326998133 - TRR 225, SA 3575/1-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reconstructive surgery remains inadequate for the treatment of volumetric muscle loss (VML). The geometry of skeletal muscle defects in VML injuries varies on a case-by-case basis. Three-dimensional (3D) printing has emerged as one strategy that enables the fabrication of scaffolds that match the geometry of the defect site. However, the time and facilities needed for imaging the defect site, processing to render computer models, and printing a suitable scaffold prevent immediate reconstructive interventions post-traumatic injuries. In addition, the proper implantation of hydrogel-based scaffolds, which have generated promising results in vitro, is a major challenge. To overcome these challenges, a paradigm is proposed in which gelatin-based hydrogels are printed directly into the defect area and cross-linked in situ. The adhesiveness of the bioink hydrogel to the skeletal muscles was assessed ex vivo. The suitability of the in situ printed bioink for the delivery of cells is successfully assessed in vitro. Acellular scaffolds are directly printed into the defect site of mice with VML injury, exhibiting proper adhesion to the surrounding tissue and promoting remnant skeletal muscle hypertrophy. The developed handheld printer capable of 3D in situ printing of adhesive scaffolds is a paradigm shift in the rapid yet precise filling of complex skeletal muscle tissue defects.

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

4.2
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