Search

The vascular network has a complex architecture such as branches, curvatures, and bifurcations which is even more complicated in view of individual patients' defect anatomy requiring custom‐specifically designed vascular implants. In this work, 3D printing is used to overcome these challenges and a new shorter impregnation method was developed to incorporate S‐nitroso‐N‐acetyl‐d‐penicillamine (SNAP) as a nitric oxide (NO) donor to printed grafts. The 3D‐printed small‐diameter vascular grafts (SDVGs) were impregnated with SNAP solution during SNAP synthesis (S1) or with SNAP dissolved in methanol (S2). The advantage of the newly developed S1 impregnation method is the elimination of the synthesis step by direct impregnation inside the S1 solution. Scanning electron microscopy imaging reveals the successful crystal formation in both methods. The results demonstrate that both S1‐ and S2‐impregnated grafts, after covering with polycaprolactone topcoat, can release NO in a controlled manner and in the physiological range (0.5–4.0 × 10−10 mol cm−2 min−1) over a 15 days period. The created grafts with a NO‐releasing surface have also shown bactericidal effect while the healing properties of the implant were improved by promoting migration and proliferation of endothelial cells (ECs). These results suggest that incorporation of 3D printing technology with the newly developed S1 impregnation of SNAP can optimize and shorten the manufacturing process of the next generation of patient‐based antibacterial SDVGs with a higher attraction for ECs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Decellularization aims to remove cells from tissue while preserving the basic properties. • Decellularized ECM is the most ideal material for preparing the bioink. • 3D bioprinting technology is able to print multiple cell types within a tissue construct. • Further efforts should be devoted to improve mechanical properties of ECM-derived bioinks. • Future attempts should also focus on bioprinting of patient-based vascularized tissues. Decellularization aims to remove cells from tissue ultrastructure while preserving the mechanical and biological properties, which makes the decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM) an appropriate scaffold for tissue engineering applications. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting technology as a reproducible and accurate method can print the combination of ECM and autologous cells layer by layer to fabricate patient based cell-laden structures representing the intrinsic cues of natural ECM. This review defines ECM, classifies decellularization agents and techniques, and explains different sources of ECM. Then, bioprinting techniques, bioink concept, applications of dECM bioinks, and finally the future perspectives of 3d bioprinting technology are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biomaterials rapid prototyping (RP), recently known as additive manufacturing (AM), has appeared as a revolutionary technology, promising to transform research into medical therapeutics. RP is a layer by layer manufacturing process which directly translates computer data such as Computer Aided Design (CAD), Computer Tomography (CT), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) into three‐dimensional (3D) objects. RP technologies play a significant role in biomedical industry such as anatomical models for surgery training/planning, rehabilitation, dentistry, customized implants, drug delivery devices, tissue engineering, and organ printing. The integration of biomaterials and rapid prototyping technologies is an exciting route in developing biomaterial implants for the past decade. This review describes and classifies the RP systems into three categories of liquid‐based, solid‐based, and powder‐based according to the initial form of their feed materials. Then, discusses possible benefits, drawbacks, and applications of each process in the field of biomaterials science and engineering. Additive manufacturing has recently appeared as a revolutionary technology in biomedical engineering. It plays a critical role in biomedical industry such as anatomical models for surgery training/planning, rehabilitation, dentistry, customized implants, drug delivery devices, tissue engineering, and organ printing. This comprehensive review summarizes all the possible categories of liquid‐based, solid‐based, and powder‐based systems for additive manufacturing of biomaterials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]