Abstract
Damage to bones resulting from trauma and tumors poses a significant challenge to human health. Consequently, current research in bone damage healing centers on developing three-dimensional (3D) scaffolding materials that facilitate and enhance the regeneration of fractured bone tissues. In this context, the careful selection of materials and preparation processes is essential for creating demanding scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. This is done to optimize the regeneration of fractured bones. This study comprehensively analyses the latest scientific advancements and difficulties in developing scaffolds for bone tissue creation. Initially, we clarified the composition and process by which bone tissue repairs itself. The review summarizes the primary uses of materials, both inorganic and organic, in scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. In addition, we present a comprehensive study of the most recent advancements in the mainstream techniques used to prepare scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. We also examine the distinct advantages of each method in great detail. This article thoroughly examines potential paths and obstacles in bone tissue engineering scaffolds for clinical applications.
Keywords: 3D-implants, biocompatibility, clinical applications, regenerative medicine
Graphical Abstract.
Introduction
Three-dimensional (3D) printing, or additive manufacturing, is a cutting-edge technique that enables the production of 3D items by building them layer by layer, using a digital design as a blueprint1–4. The process commences with a digital file, such as a computer-aided design (CAD) model, serves as a blueprint for the desired object5,6. The computerized model is segmented into thin, cross-sectional layers, then printed or deposited using various materials and techniques7,8. Multiple 3D printing techniques are available, each with unique features and materials that can be used9,10. Widely used methods include fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), and binder jetting. In addition, ceramics are utilized in 3D printing, which has significantly progressed in various industries, such as electronics and healthcare. Ceramic powders are employed in ceramic 3D printing11,12.
Hybrid materials (HMs) denote one of the most emergent material classes at the edge of technological advancements 13 . Material properties achieved via a synergetic combination of more than one component on the molecular scale make HMs attractive for several applications 14 . There are several approaches to the classification of HM. They can be based on the source of origin, bonding, properties, and formation route, and highly favored materials in 3D printing 15 . Commonly utilized materials include PCL, PLA/HA, PCL/GelMA, Silk Fibroin/Bioactive Glass, Chitosan/β-TCP, and PLGA/Collagen. Every hybrid variety has unique attributes, such as its durability, flexibility, resistance to temperature changes, and ease of printing16,17. 3D printing utilizes metal as a substitute material 18 .
Metals such as cobalt-chrome, titanium, stainless steel, and aluminum are usually cast-off in additive manufacturing19,20. Durable metal components are produced through the layer-by-layer fusion of metal powders utilizing selective laser melting (SLM) or electron beam melting (EBM) techniques in metal 3D printing 21 . In addition, ceramics are used in 3D printing, which has advanced uses in industries including electronics and healthcare. Ceramic powders are used in ceramic 3D printing 22 .
The human skeletal system functions as a fundamental framework, offering structural support and safeguarding the organism23,24. Nevertheless, various causes, such as the natural process of aging, physical injuries, or medical conditions, can contribute to the diminished strength or impairment of bones, ultimately resulting in substantial health complications25,26. Lately, there has been an increasing fascination with advancing novel techniques for identifying, measuring, and identifying diseases through various means 27 . To properly treat bone illnesses and injuries, it is necessary to utilize tissue engineering and regenerative medicine procedures 28 . One practical approach in biomedical applications is the utilization of bone scaffolds. These scaffolds are like a 3D framework for tissue regeneration and promote the development of new tissues and bones 29 . Because bone tissue is self-repairing and regenerating, minor flaws typically disappear independently. However, when bone abnormalities grow more significant than a critical size barrier (about >2 cm), the healing process is inadequate and frequently fails to mend30–32. Every year, 4 million people worldwide need bone replacement surgery or grafts33,34. As a result, treating bone abnormalities effectively is crucial from a clinical standpoint35,36. In clinics, bone grafting is a mainstay. Depending on the circumstances, the defect site can heal successfully using different grafts37,38.
Customized solutions for individual patients: 3D printing produces bone scaffolds tailored to each patient’s needs 39 . This individualized strategy optimizes the efficacy of the treatment, enhancing bone rejuvenation consequences and minimizing the likelihood of problems 40 . Biocompatibility: 3D-printed bone scaffolds can be fabricated using biocompatible materials, such as bioceramics or biodegradable polymers, which are highly compatible with the human body 41 . These compounds enhance cell attachment, proliferation, and differentiation, aiding the regeneration of new bone tissue 42 . This article concisely summarizes the recent advancements in the research and enhancement of 3D printing methods for producing scaffolds utilized in bone tissue engineering 43 .
Critical Requirements for 3D Printed Scaffolds
3D printing has significantly transformed the field of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, specifically in the field of bone scaffolds44,45. Researchers can develop scaffolds that imitate the form and function of genuine bone by using biomaterials, advanced 3D printing technology, and detailed design procedures46,47. Scaffolds provide customized mechanical characteristics, such as rigidity, durability, and adaptability, together with interconnected porous structures that improve the infiltration of cells and the exchange of nutrients48,49. 3D-printed bone scaffolds are an excellent choice for patients requiring bone regeneration as long as they fulfill the criteria of biocompatibility, scaffold structure, sterilization, and regulatory compliance19,50. These scaffolds offer individualized bone repair, tissue regeneration, and enhanced quality of life. To achieve this objective, the initial and most crucial stage is thoroughly comprehending the requirements51,52. They are given in Table 1.
Table 1.
Biomedical Application and Properties of Hybrid Scaffolds for Clinical Application.
Scaffold type | Materials | 3D printing technology | Pore Size (µm) | Mechanical properties | Biological properties | Growth factors | Degradation rate (months) | Applications | Ref |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scaffold 1 | PLA/HA | Fused deposition modeling | 300–500 | Compressive Strength: 5 MPa | Supports osteoblast proliferation | BMP-2 | 6–12 | Bone tissue engineering | 53 |
Scaffold 2 | PCL/GelMA | Stereolithography (SLA) | 100–300 | Elastic Modulus: 50 MPa | Enhances vascularisation | VEGF, TGF*-β1 | 12–18 | Cartilage regeneration | 54 |
Scaffold 3 | PLGA/collagen | Selective laser sintering | 200–400 | Tensile Strength: 10 MPa | Promotes cell adhesion and growth | FGF*-2 | 4–6 | Soft tissue engineering | 55 |
Scaffold 4 | PEGDA/HAp | Digital Light Processing | 250–350 | Flexural Strength: 15 MPa | High biocompatibility | IGF*-1 | 3–5 | Dental implants | 56 |
Scaffold 5 | Silk fibroin/bioactive glass | Inkjet Printing | 150–250 | Shear Modulus: 20 MPa | Stimulates osteogenic differentiation | BMP*-7 | 8–10 | Bone grafts | 57 |
Scaffold 6 | Chitosan/β-TCP* | Extrusion Bioprinting | 200–500 | Compressive Modulus: 6 MPa | Antibacterial properties support chondrocyte growth | PDGF*, TGF-β3 | 3–6 | Cartilage and bone regeneration | 58 |
Scaffold 7 | Alginate/GelMA | Micro Extrusion | 100–200 | Young’s Modulus: 1–2 MPa | Supports angiogenesis, biocompatible | VEGF, bFGF* | 1–3 | Vascular tissue engineering | 59 |
Scaffold 8 | PEEK*/carbon nanotubes | Melt Extrusion | 400–600 | Elastic Modulus: 5–10 MPa | Enhanced mechanical properties support osteogenesis | BMP-2, IGF-1 | Less than 24 | Load-bearing orthopedic implants | |
Scaffold 9 | Hyaluronic acid/PLGA | Electrospinning | 50–150 | Compressive Strength: 3 MPa | Promotes wound healing, supports fibroblast activity | EGF, PDGF | 2–4 | Skin tissue engineering | 60 |
Scaffold 10 | PVA*/hydroxyapatite | Direct Ink Writing | 150–350 | High tensile strength: 80 MPa | Osteoconductive, supports osteoblast proliferation | BMP-4 | 6–8 | Bone defect repair | 61 |
TGF-β1: Transforming growth factor beta 1*FGF: fibroblast growth factor*IGF: Insulin-like growth factor *PDGF: platelet-derived growth factor *bFGF: basic fibroblast growth factor *EGF: epidermal growth factor *β-TCP: beta-tricalcium phosphate *PEEK: polyether ether ketone *PVA: polyvinyl alcohol.
While there have been thorough examinations of scaffolds made from metal, ceramic, and polymers, more research is needed on hybrid scaffolds for advanced therapeutic purposes62,63. It is imperative to thoroughly investigate how hybrid scaffolds might effectively address crucial therapeutic requirements64,65. This encompasses a brief comprehension of their function in biomimetics, accurate bone regeneration, focused drug administration, tumor therapy, and infection treatment66,67. Exploring the incorporation of biomimetic characteristics into these scaffolds remains an unexplored domain, and conducting research is crucial to enhance compositions for more efficient bone regeneration68,69. Furthermore, there are unexplored possibilities in regulated drug administration, targeted treatments, and infection control70,71.
The Mechanism for Repairing Bone Tissue
The bone tissue repair and healing process is intricate and consists of several phases72,73. These stages primarily include inflammation and the formation of a blood clot, the recruitment and multiplication of stem cells, the development of blood vessels, the specialization of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and the final phase of tissue remodeling74,75. Fractures disrupt a specific area of the blood vessels and nearby tissue, creating a hematoma and the following inflammatory phase. Within 24 hours following the fracture, the soft matrix at the hematoma site attracts immune cells to facilitate an inflammatory response76,77. After some time (week), the hematoma and inflammatory response are resolved, and the hematoma site is replaced by granulation tissue78,79. Following the inflammatory and hematoma phase, many cells, including osteoblasts and endothelial cells, become active at the location of the defect. In addition to the proliferation of stem cells, angiogenesis occurs throughout the bone tissue healing process80,81. Many blood vessels in bone are crucial for bone regeneration Fig. 1. The process of ultimate bone remodeling is a physiological phenomenon significantly influenced by the interaction between osteoblasts and osteoclasts82,83. An essential objective is to integrate the attributes and principles of each step in bone tissue restoration with scaffolds, enhancing the performance of the scaffold materials through targeted alterations to attain superior and more effective outcomes in treating bone abnormalities 84 .
Figure 1.
Schematic illustration of bioactive response of 3D-printed scaffolds during physiological immersion.
The Scaffold Structure Design Ensures Safety and Efficiency on Construction Sites
A 3D model of the scaffold can be created and transformed into a printable setup like Stereolithography (STL)85,86. Customized scaffold shapes could be generated via CAD software based on specific patient structural anatomical data about the lesion87,88. A 3D model is created by analyzing the anatomical data of the affected area, which is collected using computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 89 . Med CAD design and interfaces, inverse engineering surfaces, and STL-triangle shape model converting procedures are various approaches to creating CAD models from therapeutic pictures 90 . Scaffolds and porous architecture are essential in tissue regeneration as they maintain tissue volume, fulfill temporary mechanical roles, and transport biofactors 91 . An effective scaffold will integrate mechanical functionality with the delivery of biofactors, facilitating a gradual transformation from scaffold to regenerated tissue as the previous scaffold breaks down 92 .
Consequently, the scaffold structure should imitate the inherent properties of genuine bone, including interconnecting pores93,94. The scaffold’s porosity is crucial for cell intrusion, nutrition exchange, and tissue amalgamation. Researchers can use 3D printing to design and fabricate pores of varying sizes and forms95–97. Fig. 2 explains the different properties required to construct the 3D scaffolds including their design, (shape, pore size, morphology) biofunctionality, (hemocompatibility, bioactivity, angiogenesis and osteointegration) manufacturing (electrospinning, SLA and 3D printing) strength (mechanical integrity, poor strength, stiffness, load bearing capacity and toughness) microstructures (degradation rate, chemical stability, processibility and crystallinity).
Figure 2.
Multifaceted evaluation parameters, including design, functionality, manufacturing, mechanical integrity, and microstructure, are required for the development of an ideal scaffold.
Tissue Engineering
Tissue engineering is a promising therapy option that uses engineering concepts to alleviate tissue damage98,99. The field consists of three essential elements: scaffolds, cells, and growth factors. Bioreactors play a vital role in tissue engineering3,100. The ideal scaffolds function as structural reinforcement for damaged tissue, transforming the growth factors produced by cancer cells into stimuli that promote tissue regeneration. Conventional approaches to treating tissue injury have faced substantial challenges throughout the years 101 .
Recent progress in bone tissue engineering has integrated growth factors and other biomolecules into scaffolds to direct cell behavior during the regeneration of organs and tissues102,103. In the past 20 years, advances have been achieved in developing and applying biological scaffold materials46,104. The three primary components of bone tissue engineering are bone progenitor cells, bone growth factors, and scaffolds90,105. These elements work together to promote cell adhesion, maintain cell function, and imitate the natural process of bone tissue regeneration106,107. The scaffold must serve as a transient template for cell regeneration of new bone tissue while also being capable of degradation to allow for replacement by the newly formed bone tissue108,109. The scaffold’s primary function is to create an ideal microenvironment for cells, facilitating new tissue production and distribution of nutrients between the cells and their surroundings 110 .
Bone Scaffold Formation
Temporary constructs known as porous scaffolds facilitate the regeneration of bone tissue by providing an appropriate environment. They promote cell attachment, growth, specialization, and migration to the injury site111,112. Scaffolds are essential to tissue engineering because they offer the best extracellular matrix (ECM) for progenitor cell proliferation and differentiation 113 . These cells can enter the scaffold and start the development, differentiation, multiplication, and migration processes because they react to biochemical and physical cues in their environment114,115. When the environment is favorable, the cells secrete ECM and produce new tissues 116 . The best scaffolds have strong adhesion to bone-forming cells, biodegradability, robustness, and consistency in their mechanical properties 117 . The cells must be able to move toward the scaffold, stick to it, and multiply. Another essential feature is the scaffold’s connected porosity, which permits precise cell development and spreading inside the porous structure 118 .
This facilitates efficient angiogenesis in the surrounding tissue. The objective of constructing bone scaffolds is to produce an environment demonstrating biophysical, biomechanical, and biochemical features responsible for cell growth, specialization, and viability. Polymers, ceramics, and metals are the primary categories of biodegradable materials that have lately been examined in clinical and research settings119,120. Therefore, a scaffold is a crucial element in tissue engineering, and to fulfill its essential function, it must possess the features mentioned above 121 .
Clinical Applications of 3D-printed Scaffolds
Wound and Infection Healing
A wound is a disruption or break in the skin caused by physical or thermal damage or a pathological cause 122 . The nature and severity of wounds vary depending on their underlying etiology, clinical manifestations, healing processes, or anatomical location 123 . Regardless of their characteristics, wounds pose a significant healthcare challenge in the development of chronic diseases as they can raise healthcare expenses and complicate both internal and external health 124 . Wound healing involves a range of well-coordinated molecular processes, including hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling 125 .
Using 3D scaffolds with stem cell delivery has shown great potential in regenerative medicine. Wang et al. explained the examples of cell types include bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, human umbilical cord perivascular cells (HUCPVC), and amniotic fluid-derived cells 126 . Stem, endothelial progenitor, and circulating angiogenic cells (CACs) are frequently studied. Haki et al. utilize early endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), also known as CACs, derived from peripheral blood mononuclear cell fraction and can be used locally to address nonhealing diabetic foot ulcers127,128. Lv et al. does the augmentation in the formation of new blood vessels and a higher proportion of wound healing was noted when a scaffold made of collagen was used to transfer CACs to a diabetic rabbit ear wound (specifically, an ulcer produced by alloxan) 129 . A 3D membrane scaffold, derived from a freeze-dried conditioned medium of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (FBMSC-CM), effectively expedited wound healing and improved the formation of new blood vessels (neovascularization) and the growth of epithelial tissue (epithelialization) by enhancing the presence of nourishing elements in the wound area130,131. Fig. 3 explains the phenomena of wound healing for a long time and how hemostasis occurs due to 3D implant scaffolds, the formation of new cells, and epithelisation leading toward the remodeling of skin or wound repair.
Figure 3.
Mechanism of wound healing from hours to months adopted with permission 122 .
Tumor Therapy
3D scaffolds represent a promising solution in tumor therapy by providing a controlled and replicable microenvironment for studying cancer progression and testing treatments 111 . Many 3D scaffolds are used to treat tumors like novel bioceramic scaffolds. These scaffolds can be engineered to mimic the ECM of tumors, allowing for more accurate modeling of tumor growth, invasion, and metastasis 115 . By incorporating bioactive molecules, such as drugs, growth factors, or genetic material, 3D scaffolds can deliver targeted therapies directly to the tumor site, potentially enhancing the efficacy and reducing the side effects of conventional treatments 129 . Moreover, Fig. 4 explains the mechanism of how local sites of proteins and membranes are being damaged by the heat-generated functional scaffolds, leading to apoptosis and cell death. As a result, scaffolds exhibiting superior photothermal or magnetothermal properties are highly effective as localized treatment agents. The ability to personalize these scaffolds based on patient-specific tumor characteristics facilitates the development of tailored therapeutic strategies, paving the way for more effective and individualized cancer treatments125,129.
Figure 4.
Schematic illustration of a bifunctional scaffold with significant potential for clinical use in bone tumor therapy. The scaffold demonstrates pronounced capabilities for both regenerating bone tissue and treating tumors.
Cartilage and Spine Injury
Cartilage is a soft bone with a minimal capacity for regeneration. When a lesion, such as osteoarthritis, is created, more innovative explanations are needed. Lan et al. 132 employed a scaffold using human nasal and chondrocytes using type 1 collagen. The scaffold was implanted in the mouse skin, and after 9 weeks, the printed cartilage regenerated its original shape and size. Cell viability decreased during the construction of the 3D structure. Similarly, after subcutaneous implantation, Beketov et al. 133 produced the scaffold using the bio-ink consisting of 4% collagen and chondrocytes. The cartilage tissue contains a high amount of COL2 and glycosaminoglycan (GAG).
A spine injury can be caused by accidents, swelling, dislocation, extrusion, and ischemia, leading to the damage of irreparable nerve cells. Neural stem cells (NSC) and their spatial distribution in the spinal cord is the route toward its successful repair again. Liu et al. 134 used different HMs to prepare the scaffold, such as bio-ink containing the mixed NSCs, hyaluronic acid derivatives, and chitosan. After implantation in the rats, it restored the locomotor abilities, called viability, and renewed axons. Similarly, another study explained how 3D-generated scaffolds with the help of gelatin combined with oligodendrocytes and NSCs improved motor skills and the production of new axons and neurons after implantation28,135.
Heart Disease and Liver Failure
Decrease of cardiac fibrosis, cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, and increase of vascular formation using the 3D-constructed scaffold to treat the congenital heart disease of right ventricle failure in the rat model by using the bio-ink containing progenitor cells laden cardiac ECM gelatin and neonatal human c-kit 136 . Similarly, to produce elongated cells that can contract, embedding the printed construct between 2 layers of rat omentum over a week using hydrogel with iPSCs differentiated into cardiomyocytes and patient-specific endothelial cells 137 .
Human hepatocytes and methacrylate gelatin bio-ink were used to treat liver failure in mice. A 3D scaffold constructed stimulated liver cells’ vascularization and normal function 138 . However, scaffolding in the mouse liver damage increased albumin expression and accelerated cell proliferation by using the 3% alginate hydrogel with induced hepatocyte cells 139 . In addition, Table 2 explains the present challenges and their solution provided by 3D technology.
Table 2.
Detailed Table with Additional Clinical Challenges and Their 3D Printing Solutions.
Clinical challenges | Description | 3D printing solution | References |
---|---|---|---|
Complex Bone Structures | Bones have intricate shapes and internal structures that are difficult to replicate accurately. | 3D printing allows precise control over the shape and internal architecture, creating patient-specific, complex structures. | 140 |
Biocompatibility and Integration | Ensuring the material is biocompatible and integrates well with native bone tissue. | 3D printing uses biocompatible materials and creates surface textures that promote better tissue integration. | 75 |
Mechanical Strength | Regenerated bone must have sufficient mechanical strength to withstand physiological loads. | 3D printing customizes scaffold properties for optimal mechanical strength and porosity. | 141 |
Vascularization | The formation of blood vessels within the scaffold is essential for supplying nutrients and removing waste. | 3D-printing designs scaffolds with channels and pores that facilitate vascularization and can incorporate growth factors or cells. | 93 |
Customization and Personalization | Each bone defect is unique, requiring personalized treatment approaches. | 3D printing produces patient-specific implants based on imaging data, ensuring a perfect fit and better functional outcomes. | 2,4 |
Cost and Accessibility | Traditional methods are often expensive and time-consuming, limiting accessibility. | 3D printing can reduce custom implants’ cost and production time, making personalized treatments more accessible. | 142 |
Infection Risk | Implantation can introduce infections, complicating healing and regeneration. | 3D printing can incorporate antimicrobial agents into the scaffold material, reducing infection risks. | 143 |
Healing Time | Long healing times can result in complications and prolonged recovery periods. | 3D-printed scaffolds can be designed to release growth factors that accelerate bone regeneration and healing. | 10 |
Osteoinductivity | The ability of a material to induce bone formation is critical for successful regeneration. | 3D printing allows for the incorporation of osteoinductive agents into the scaffold, promoting new bone growth. | 144 |
Structural Stability | Ensuring the scaffold maintains its shape and functionality over time is crucial. | 3D-printed scaffolds can be designed with optimal degradation rates, balancing structural stability with tissue regeneration. | 90 |
Supply Chain and Scalability | Manufacturing and delivering custom implants on a large scale can be challenging. | 3D printing enables on-demand, localized production of implants, improving supply chain efficiency and scalability. | 104 |
Hybrid Scaffolds
Hybrid scaffolds are a promising field of study because they combine multiple materials to create improved features better suited for various tissue engineering applications. PCL/collagen scaffolds have been employed to fabricate artificial human skin145,146. The resulting material gains muscular tensile strength by combining collagen with a small amount of PCL. This makes it helpful in creating scaffolds perfect for human skin tissue engineering147,148. Recent investigations indicate that NPs are widely utilized in biomedical applications, including biosensing of metabolites, drug delivery, bioimaging, anti-biofilm, and antibacterial applications 149,150. A study utilized PCL combined with titanium oxide, which has antibacterial properties and is coated with collagen to create a wound dressing material with antibacterial capabilities103,151. A different research study utilized human endometrial stem cells (hEnSCs) by introducing them into a PCL/collagen scaffold to create an innovative structure for skin engineering 152 . Due to the endometrium’s remarkable regenerative ability, this nanofiber was suggested to stimulate angiogenesis without needing growth hormones. This indicates its potential for repairing skin tissue during wound healing 153 . A composite of poly L-lactide (PLLA) and chitosan was created to preserve the essential properties of both materials. PLLA possesses high mechanical strength but is not conducive to cell growth 154 .
On the contrary, chitosan demonstrates favorable tissue regeneration capabilities, but it lacks sufficient strength58,105. Consequently, collagen was utilized to construct scaffolds with funnel-shaped structures with pores, enabling the cells to proliferate and establish connections beneath the surface 77 . Subsequently, the collagen funnels were positioned onto a PLLA mesh to create hybrid scaffolds. Animal experiments have demonstrated that applying these hybrid scaffolds to seed fibroblast cells can improve the repair of incisional lesions17,52,126. Combining chitosan and silk nanofibrils has been utilized to create nanocomposite scaffolds that demonstrate excellent resistance to high temperatures and impressive mechanical durability 126 . The nanocomposites share a comparable composition with the ECM, so they can produce a more sophisticated biomaterial for skin engineering 155 . An article has described a bilayer nanocomposite scaffold made from silk fibroin, gelatin, and oxidized alginate. This scaffold has a structure comparable to the ECM and has the potential to be used in regenerative medicine and skin engineering 156 . The efficacy of hybrid collagen scaffolds containing ZnO-curcumin nanocomposites was assessed to promote accelerated wound healing and minimize scarring 157 . An 80% cell viability was recorded, indicating a favorable cell growth and attachment level. Experiments conducted on live albino rats showed an increase in the expression of TGF-β3 and a notable recovery of burnt wounds without scarring 158 . A separate research project involved the creation of a nanocomposite scaffold using chitosan and PVA. This scaffold was infused with photogenic iron oxide nanoparticles (FeO NPs) to investigate their effects on diabetic wounds associated with anemia 159 . The FeO NPs were synthesized using a leaf extract obtained from Pinus densiflora. The FeO NPs exhibited favorable anti-diabetic and antioxidant effects in biological experiments and antibacterial solid capabilities 160 . The in vitro wound healing experiment demonstrated enhanced cellular proliferation by HEK 293 cells. These data indicate that this composite scaffold could be used for treating diabetic wounds, pending a thorough in vivo assessment161,162. Table 3 summarizes various hybrid polymers utilized as scaffolds for applications in wound healing and skin tissue engineering 163 .
Table 3.
shows the Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Hybrid Scaffold Materials Used in Biomedical Applications.
Material | Advantages | Disadvantages | Ref |
---|---|---|---|
PLA (polylactic acid)/HA (Hydroxyapatite) | –Biocompatible and biodegradable –Good mechanical properties –Promotes bone regeneration and integration |
–Slow degradation rate, –Potential for acidic degradation products –Limited cell adhesion without surface modification |
53 |
PCL (polycaprolactone)/GelMA (gelatin methacrylate) | –Biocompatible and biodegradable –Flexible and elastic –Supports cell adhesion and proliferation –Tunable degradation rate |
–Lower mechanical strength compared to some other materials –Possible immune response to gelatin components |
97 |
PLGA (poly[ acid])/collagen | –Excellent biocompatibility –Supports cell adhesion and growth –Tunable degradation rate –Versatile mechanical properties |
–Potential for acidic degradation products –Rapid degradation rate can sometimes be too fast |
77 |
PEGDA (polyethylene glycol diacrylate)/HAp (hydroxyapatite) | –High biocompatibility –Tunable mechanical properties –Non–toxic degradation products –Supports osteogenic differentiation |
–Limited mechanical strength for load–bearing applications –Requires functionalisation for enhanced cell interaction |
163 |
Silk fibroin/bioactive glass | –Excellent biocompatibility –Supports osteogenesis –Good mechanical properties –Bioactive properties |
–Potential brittleness –Limited degradation rate control |
164 |
Chitosan/β-TCP (beta-tricalcium phosphate) | –Biocompatible and biodegradable –Antibacterial properties –Supports bone and cartilage regeneration |
–Variable degradation rate –Mechanical properties can be lower than synthetic polymers |
77,105,58 |
Alginate/GelMA (gelatin methacrylate) | –Biocompatible and biodegradable –Supports cell proliferation –Easy to process and print –Promotes angiogenesis |
Poor mechanical properties alone –Rapid degradation in physiological conditions |
134 |
PEEK (polyether ether ketone)/carbon nanotubes | Excellent mechanical properties –Biocompatible –Supports osteogenesis –High wear resistance |
–Non–biodegradable –Potential toxicity of carbon nanotubes –Expensive and difficult to process |
165 |
Hyaluronic acid/PLGA (poly[ acid]) | Excellent biocompatibility Supports wound healing Tunable degradation rate Promotes fibroblast activity |
Potential for acidic degradation products –Requires stabilization for mechanical integrity |
60,166 |
PVA (polyvinyl alcohol)/hydroxyapatite | Biocompatible –Supports osteoblast proliferation –Good mechanical properties –Hydrophilic nature |
–Non–biodegradable –Potential for rapid swelling and loss of mechanical properties in aqueous environments |
167 |
Future Perspectives
The application of 3D printing in bone tissue engineering is now undergoing extensive research and exploration. The primary benefit of this technology is its capacity to regulate the arrangement of fibers, leading to scaffolds that exhibit superior performance due to their optimized structure and function at many scales 168 . Despite the advancements in 3D printing technology, certain constraints still impede the application of tissue engineering scaffolds in practical medical settings. For instance, the selection of printing materials is restricted 169 . It is essential to consider the physiochemical qualities of the materials, such as rheology (flow behavior), wetting performance, and melting point 170 .
In addition, their biological properties should also be considered, including biodegradability, biocompatibility, and cell interaction. Internal faults may arise during printing, leading to subpar mechanical quality in the printed product 171 . To utilize 3D printing technology effectively, it is crucial to thoroughly examine ink materials regarding material selection, design of 3D structures, and function novelty. Furthermore, the printing procedure is essential to optimize the associated parameters for high-quality outcomes172,173. Although several fabrication material concerns have not yet been resolved, there is still ample opportunity to investigate beneficial approaches for bone tissue engineering. The current research on repairing infected bones needs a thorough grasp of the repair mechanism in a complicated model of infected bone defects174,175. The currently described bone analogs possess only one specific function, and creating bone analogs capable of performing multiple tasks in an integrated manner remains a significant challenge 176 . Vascularization is essential for developing organs in massive bone tissues, as they require a well-developed network of blood vessels to provide nutrients and oxygen. Regrettably, the construction of vascular networks remains a significant obstacle due to the low vascularization of bone tissue 177 .
To efficiently address these glitches, it is vital to understand the inherent structural properties of bone tissue and the natural mechanisms involved in bone tissue healing and regeneration, including the impacts and interplay of many factors in infected bone defects 178 . The design of bone tissue engineering scaffolds should aim to replicate the bionic structure of natural bone tissue. These scaffolds can be enhanced by incorporating inflammatory cytokines, ECM, and ligands. This integration allows for imitating the initial phases of bone regeneration and tissue repair179–181.
Conclusion
Infected bone injuries and defects are still a core problem for orthopedic surgeons and practitioners. Engineering technologies and biological integration are critical elements in developing bone tissues. This review concisely discusses strategies for addressing bone defects through sustainable hybrid 3D-printed scaffold materials. A fundamental requirement for bone defects is the promotion of tissue regeneration and the stopping of bone infection. Many factors are responsible for this infection therapy, which include antibacterial coatings, bioactive metal ions, anti-infective drugs, and 3D-printed scaffolds that collectively fight against bone issues and treat osteomyelitis by producing the ideal microenvironment for rapid bone growth. Moreover, essential factors like photothermal, electric, and magnetic stimuli can be enhanced to promote bone regeneration during the loading of the 3D porous scaffolds. In tissue engineering, 3D-printed scaffold technology is currently the most reasonable solution for designing scaffolds according to infected patients’ complex shape injuries.
Footnotes
Authors Contribution: A.R.K. and N.S.G. wrote the manuscript and collected all the data. F M. O.T, F. T, and R. M.Z they also interpreted the manuscript’s results. H-J. Z. and Z. J. developed the theory and reviewed the manuscript.
Ethical Approval: This study was approved by our institutional review board.
Statement of Human and Animal Rights: This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.
Statement of Informed Consent: There are no human subjects in this article and informed consent is not applicable.
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is supported by the Researchers Supporting Project Number (RSP2024R440), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
ORCID iD: Ahsan Riaz Khan
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9683-4728
References
- 1. Poltue T, Karuna C, Khrueaduangkham S, Seehanam S, Promoppatum P. Design exploration of 3D-printed triply periodic minimal surface scaffolds for bone implants. Int J Mech Sci. 2021;211:106762. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106762. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Mirkhalaf M, Men Y, Wang R, No Y, Zreiqat H. Personalized 3D printed bone scaffolds: a review. Acta Biomater. 2023;156:110–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Kennedy SW, Roy Choudhury N, Parthasarathy R. 3D printing soft tissue scaffolds using Poly(caprolactone). Bioprinting. 2023;30:1–11 [Google Scholar]
- 4. Wang C, Huang W, Zhou Y, He L, He Z, Chen Z, He X, Tian S, Liao J, Lu B, Wei Y. 3D printing of bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Bioact Mater. 2020;5:82–91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Zhang Q, Zhou J, Zhi P, Liu L, Liu C, Fang A, Zhang Q. 3D printing method for bone tissue engineering scaffold. Med Nov Technol Devices. Epub 2023 Mar 17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Liu D, Nie W, Li D, Wang W, Zheng L, Zhang J, Zhang J, Peng C, Mo X, He C. 3D printed PCL/SrHA scaffold for enhanced bone regeneration. Chem Eng J 2019;362:269–79. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Zou L, Hu L, Pan P, Tarafder S, Du M, Geng Y, Xu G, Chen L, Chen J, Lee CH. Icariin-releasing 3D printed scaffold for bone regeneration. Compos B Eng. 2022;232: 109625. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Lima MJ, Correlo VM, Reis RL. Micro/nano replication and 3D assembling techniques for scaffold fabrication. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014;42:615–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Chen S, Shi Y, Zhang X, Ma J. 3D printed hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds with enhanced mechanical properties. Ceram Int. 2019;45:10991–96. [Google Scholar]
- 10. Yayehrad AT, Siraj EA, Matsabisa M, Birhanu G. 3D printed drug loaded nanomaterials for wound healing applications. Regen Ther. 2023;24:361–76. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Kanwar S, Vijayavenkataraman S. Design of 3D printed scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: a review. Bioprinting. 2021;24:e00167. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2021.e00167. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Kondiah PP, Choonara YE, Kondiah PJ, Marimuthu T, du Toit LC, Kumar P, Pillay V. Recent progress in 3D-printed polymeric scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. In: du Toit LC, Kumar P, Pillay V, Choonara YE, editors. Advanced 3D-printed Systems and Nanosystems for Drug Delivery and Tissue Engineering. Elsevier; 2020, p. 59–81. [Google Scholar]
- 13. Zhao Q, Cui H, Wang J, Chen H, Wang Y, Zhang L, Du X, Wang M. Regulation effects of biomimetic hybrid scaffolds on vascular endothelium remodeling. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10:23583–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Moreno L, Mohedano M, Arrabal R, Rodríguez-Hernández J, Matykina E. Development of hybrid hierarchical coatings on Mg3Zn0.4Ca alloy for orthopaedic implants. J Mater Res Technol. 2023;24:5823–38. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Ramkumar P, Rijwani T. Additive manufacturing of metals and ceramics using hybrid fused filament fabrication. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng. 2022;44:455. [Google Scholar]
- 16. González-Ulloa G, Jiménez-Rosado M, Benhnia MR, Romero A, Ruiz-Mateos E, Ostos FJ, Perez-Puyana V. Hybrid polymeric Hydrogel-based biomaterials with potential applications in regenerative medicine. J Mol Liq;. 2023;384. [Google Scholar]
- 17. Chang C, Peng N, He M, Teramoto Y, Nishio Y, Zhang L. Fabrication and properties of chitin/hydroxyapatite hybrid hydrogels as scaffold nano-materials. Carbohydr Polym. 2013;91:7–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Sooriyaarachchi D, Wu J, Feng A, Islam M, Tan GZ. Hybrid fabrication of biomimetic meniscus scaffold by 3D printing and parallel electrospinning. Procedia Manuf. 2019;34:528–34. [Google Scholar]
- 19. Rahmani R, Kamboj N, Brojan M, Antonov M, Prashanth KG. Hybrid metal-ceramic biomaterials fabricated through powder bed fusion and powder metallurgy for improved impact resistance of craniofacial implants. Materialia. 2022;24:101465. doi: 10.1016/j.mtla.2022.101465. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Liu C, Lin J, Tang L, Liu Z, Jiang Z, Lian K. Design of metal-polymer structure for dental implants with stiffness adaptable to alveolar bone. Composites Communications. 2021;24:100660. doi: 10.1016/j.coco.2021.100660. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Elsayed MH, Jayakumar J, Abdellah M, Mansoure TH, Zheng K, Elewa AM, Chang CL, Ting LY, Lin WC, Yu HH, Wang WH. Visible-light-driven hydrogen evolution using nitrogen-doped carbon quantum dot-implanted polymer dots as metal-free photocatalysts. Appl Catal B, 2021; 283:119659. [Google Scholar]
- 22. Kim JY, Kim JH, Ahn G, An SH, Ryu RH, Kim JS, Kim YC, Shim JH, Kim SY, Yun WS. In vitro study of three-dimensional printed metal-polymer hybrid scaffold incorporated dual antibiotics for treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. Mater Lett. 2018;212:263–66. [Google Scholar]
- 23. Silva M, Felismina R, Mateus A, Parreira P, Malça C. Application of a hybrid additive manufacturing methodology to produce a metal/polymer customized dental implant. Procedia Manuf. 2017;12:150–55. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Bretosh K, Hallais S, Chevalier-Cesar C, Zucchi G, Bodelot L. Gold metallization of hybrid organic-inorganic polymer microstructures 3D printed by two-photon polymerization. Surfaces and Interfaces. 2024;39:102895. [Google Scholar]
- 25. Nieman DC, Wentz LM. The compelling link between physical activity and the body’s defense system. J Sport Health Sci. 2019;8(3):201–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Nieman DC. Clinical implications of exercise immunology. J Sport Health Sci. 2012;1:12–17. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Moura DM, de Araújo GM, de Araújo LN, de Vasconcelos Gurgel BC, Dal Piva AM, Ozcan M, e Souza RO. Clinical performance of monolithic polymer-infiltrated ceramic and lithium disilicate posterior crowns: a controlled, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial. J Prosthet Dent. Epub 2023 Sep 8. [DOI] [PubMed]
- 28. Kara A, Distler T, Polley C, Schneidereit D, Seitz H, Friedrich O, Tihminlioglu F, Boccaccini AR. 3D printed gelatin/decellularized bone composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: fabrication, characterization and cytocompatibility study. Mater Today Bio. 2022;15:100309. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Raja N, Han SH, Cho M, Choi YJ, Jin YZ, Park H, Lee JH, Yun HS. Effect of porosity and phase composition in 3D printed calcium phosphate scaffolds on bone tissue regeneration in vivo. Mater Des. 2022;219:110819. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Kanwar S, Al-Ketan O, Vijayavenkataraman S. A novel method to design biomimetic, 3D printable stochastic scaffolds with controlled porosity for bone tissue engineering. Mater Des. 2022;220:110857. [Google Scholar]
- 31. Rastogi P, Kandasubramanian B. Breakthrough in the printing tactics for stimuli-responsive materials: 4D printing. Chem Eng J. 2019;366:264–304. [Google Scholar]
- 32. Patdiya J, Kandasubramanian B. Progress in 4D printing of stimuli responsive materials. Polym Plast Technol Mater. 2021;60:1845–83. [Google Scholar]
- 33. Wang L, Zheng H, Du C, Shi Z, Ren L, Wang Y. Construct scaffold-like delivery system with poly (lactic-co-glycolic) microspheres on micro-arc oxidation titanium. Appl Surf Sci. 2013;266:81–88. [Google Scholar]
- 34. Browe DC, Díaz-Payno PJ, Freeman FE, Schipani R, Burdis R, Ahern DP, Nulty JM, Guler S, Randall LD, Buckley CT, Brama PA. Bilayered extracellular matrix derived scaffolds with anisotropic pore architecture guide tissue organization during osteochondral defect repair. Acta Biomater. 2022;143:266–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Singh N, Batra U, Kumar K, Mahapatro A. Investigating TiO2–HA–PCL hybrid coating as an efficient corrosion resistant barrier of ZM21 Mg alloy. J Magnes Alloy. 2021;9:627–46. [Google Scholar]
- 36. Singh N, Batra U, Kumar K, Siddiquee AN. Evaluating the Electrochemical and in vitro degradation of an HA-Titania Nano-channeled coating for effective corrosion resistance of biodegradable Mg alloy. Coatings. 2022;13:30. [Google Scholar]
- 37. Xie X, Cai J, Li D, Chen Y, Wang C, Hou G, Steinberg T, Rolauffs B, El-Newehy M, El-Hamshary H, Jiang J, et al. Multiphasic bone-ligament-bone integrated scaffold enhances ligamentization and graft-bone integration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Bioact Mater. 2024;31:178–91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Wang L, Shen M, Hou Q, Wu Z, Xu J, Wang L. 3D printing of reduced glutathione grafted gelatine methacrylate hydrogel scaffold promotes diabetic bone regeneration by activating PI3K/Akt signaling pathway. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;222:1175–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Shi ZZ, Yu J, Liu XF, Zhang HJ, Zhang DW, Yin YX, Wang LN. Effects of Ag, Cu or Ca addition on microstructure and comprehensive properties of biodegradable Zn-0.8Mn alloy. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019;99:969–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Khan AR, Alnoud MAH, Ali H, Ali I, Ahmad S, Ul Hassan SS, Shaikh AL, Hussain T, Khan MU, Khan SU, Khan MS, et al. Beyond the beat: a pioneering investigation into exercise modalities for alleviating diabetic cardiomyopathy and enhancing cardiac health. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2024;49(2):102222. doi: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2023.102222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Mahmood A, Akram T, Shenggui C, Chen H. Revolutionizing manufacturing: a review of 4D printing materials, stimuli, and cutting-edge applications. Compos B Eng. 2023; 266:110952. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2023.110952. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Kovaleva PA, Pariy IO, Chernozem RV, Zadorozhnyy MY, Permyakova ES, Kolesnikov EA, Surmeneva MA, Surmenev RA, Senatov FS. Shape memory effect in hybrid polylactide-based polymer scaffolds functionalized with reduced graphene oxide for tissue engineering. Eur Polym J. 2022;181:111694. [Google Scholar]
- 43. Ameen AA, Takhakh AM, Abdal-hay A. An overview of the latest research on the impact of 3D printing parameters on shape memory polymers. European Polymer Journal. 2023;194:112145. [Google Scholar]
- 44. Calori IR, Braga G, de Jesus PD, Bi H, Tedesco AC. Polymer scaffolds as drug delivery systems. Eur Polym J. 2020;129:109621. [Google Scholar]
- 45. Tut TA, Cesur S, Ilhan E, Sahin A, Yildirim OS, Gunduz O. Gentamicin-loaded polyvinyl alcohol/whey protein isolate/hydroxyapatite 3D composite scaffolds with drug delivery capability for bone tissue engineering applications. Eur Polym J. 2022;179:111580. [Google Scholar]
- 46. Jang JW, Min KE, Kim C, Shin J, Lee J, Yi S. Review: scaffold characteristics, fabrication methods, and biomaterials for the bone tissue engineering. Int J Precis Eng Manuf-Smart Tech. 2023;24:511–29. [Google Scholar]
- 47. Di Giacomo GD, Cury PR, da Silva AM, da Silva JV, Ajzen SA. Surgical guides for flapless dental implant placement and immediate definitive prosthesis installation by using selective laser melting and sintering for 3D metal and polymer printing: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;131:177–79. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.05.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Zhang M, Liu Y, Zhou Y, Wang Y, Mickymaray S, Alothaim AS, Kannaiyan M, Li X. In vitro investigation of cartilage regeneration properties of polymeric ceramic hybrid composite. J Saudi Chem Soc. 2022;26:101470. [Google Scholar]
- 49. Aguero L, Alpdagtas S, Ilhan E, Zaldivar-Silva D, Gunduz O. Functional role of crosslinking in alginate scaffold for drug delivery and tissue engineering: a review. Eur Polym J. 2021;160:110807. [Google Scholar]
- 50. Rohr N, Brunner S, Märtin S, Fischer J. Influence of cement type and ceramic primer on retention of polymer-infiltrated ceramic crowns to a one-piece zirconia implant. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(1):138–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Kiran AS, Kizhakeyil A, Ramalingam R, Verma NK, Lakshminarayanan R, Kumar TS, Doble M, Ramakrishna S. Drug loaded electrospun polymer/ceramic composite nanofibrous coatings on titanium for implant related infections. Ceram Int. 2019;45:18710–20. [Google Scholar]
- 52. Sadeghianmaryan A, Naghieh S, Yazdanpanah Z, Sardroud HA, Sharma NK, Wilson LD, Chen X. Fabrication of chitosan/alginate/hydroxyapatite hybrid scaffolds using 3D printing and impregnating techniques for potential cartilage regeneration. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;204:62–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Zhang B, Wang L, Song P, Pei X, Sun H, Wu L, Zhou C, Wang K, Fan Y, Zhang X. 3D printed bone tissue regenerative PLA/HA scaffolds with comprehensive performance optimizations. Mater Des. 2021;201:109490. [Google Scholar]
- 54. Dong Q, Zhang M, Zhou X, Shao Y, Li J, Wang L, Chu C, Xue F, Yao Q, Bai J. 3D-printed Mg-incorporated PCL-based scaffolds: a promising approach for bone healing. Mater Sci Eng C. 2021;129:112372. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Moncal KK, Aydin RST, Abu-Laban M, Heo DN, Rizk E, Tucker SM, Lewis GS, Hayes D, Ozbolat IT. Collagen-infilled 3D printed scaffolds loaded with miR-148b-transfected bone marrow stem cells improve calvarial bone regeneration in rats. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019;105:110128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Han Y, Lian M, Zhang C, Jia B, Wu Q, Sun B, Qiao Z, Sun B, Dai K. Study on bioactive PEGDA/ECM hybrid bi-layered hydrogel scaffolds fabricated by electro-writing for cartilage regeneration. Appl Mater Today. 2022;28:101547. [Google Scholar]
- 57. Logeshwaran A, Srinivas CK, Venkatesh V, Nayak S. Silk fibroin infilled 3D printed polymer-ceramic scaffold to enhance cell adhesion and cell viability. Mater Lett. 2023;347:134607. [Google Scholar]
- 58. Jirofti N, Hashemi M, Moradi A, Kalalinia F. Fabrication and characterization of 3D printing biocompatible crocin-loaded chitosan/collagen/hydroxyapatite-based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;252:126279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Koch F, Thaden O, Conrad S, Tröndle K, Finkenzeller G, Zengerle R, Kartmann S, Zimmermann S, Koltay P. Mechanical properties of polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds for hybrid 3D-bioprinting with alginate-gelatin hydrogel. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2022;130:105219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Gouda M, Almutairi HH, Abd El-Lateef HM. Hyaluronic acid/cellulose acetate polymeric mixture containing binary metal oxide nano-hybrid as low biodegradable wound dressing. J Mater Res Technol. 2023;26:7925–35. [Google Scholar]
- 61. Supriya Bhatt S, Thakur G, Nune M. Preparation and characterization of PVA/Chitosan cross-linked 3D scaffolds for liver tissue engineering. Mater Today Proc. Epub 2023 Mar 1. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.02.251. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Saneei Mousavi MS, Karami AH, Ghasemnejad M, Kolahdouz M, Manteghi F, Ataei F. Design of a remote-control drug delivery implantable chip for cancer local on demand therapy using ionic polymer metal composite actuator. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;86:250–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Moaref R, Shahini MH, Mohammadloo HE, Ramezanzadeh B, Yazdani S. Application of sustainable polymers for reinforcing bio-corrosion protection of magnesium implants: a review. Sustain Chem Pharm. 2022;29:100780. [Google Scholar]
- 64. Mohamadi PS, Hivechi A, Bahrami SH, Nezari S, Milan PB, Amoupour M. Fabrication and investigating in vivo wound healing property of coconut oil loaded nanofiber/hydrogel hybrid scaffold. Biomater Adv. 2022;142:213139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Krishna DV, Sankar MR. Machine learning-assisted extrusion-based 3D bioprinting for tissue regeneration applications. Annals of 3D Printed Medicine, 2023;12:100132. doi: 10.1016/j.stlm.2023.100132. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Yang SP, Wen HS, Lee TM, Lui TS. Cell response on the biomimetic scaffold of silicon nano- and micro-topography. J Mater Chem B. 2016;4:1891–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Meier EL, Jang Y. Surface design strategies of polymeric biomedical implants for antibacterial properties. Curr Opin Biomed Eng. 2023;26:100448. [Google Scholar]
- 68. Ribas RG, Schatkoski VM, do Amaral Montanheiro TL, de Menezes BR, Stegemann C, Leite DM, Thim GP. Current advances in bone tissue engineering concerning ceramic and bioglass scaffolds: a review. Ceram Int. 2019;45:21051–61. [Google Scholar]
- 69. Reivan Ortiz GG, Cespedes Panduro B, Saba I, Cotrina Aliaga JC, Mohany M, Al Rejaie SS, Arias Gonzales JL, Ramiz Cornell AA, Kadham MJ, Akhavan Sigari R. Adsorption of thiotepa anticancer by the assistance of aluminum nitride nanocage scaffolds: a computational perspective on drug delivery applications. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp. 2023; 666:131276. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2023.131276. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Mehta S, Saini A, Singh H, Singh G, Buddhi D. Advancements in polymer composites as a pertinent biomaterial for hard tissue applications—a review. Mater Today Proc. 2022;69:344–48. [Google Scholar]
- 71. Al-Shalawi FD, Hanim MA, Ariffin MK, Kim CL, Brabazon D, Calin R, Al-Osaimi MO. Biodegradable synthetic polymer in orthopaedic application: a review. Mater Today Proc. 2023;74:540–46. [Google Scholar]
- 72. Ji J, Wang C, Xiong Z, Pang Y, Sun W. 3D-printed scaffold with halloysite nanotubes laden as a sequential drug delivery system regulates vascularized bone tissue healing. Mater Today Adv. 2022;15:100259. [Google Scholar]
- 73. Torres AL, Gaspar VM, Serra IR, Diogo GS, Fradique R, Silva AP, Correia IJ. Bioactive polymeric-ceramic hybrid 3D scaffold for application in bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2013;33(7):4460–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Araújo M, Viveiros R, Philippart A, Miola M, Doumett S, Baldi G, Perez J, Boccaccini AR, Aguiar-Ricardo A, Verné E. Bioactivity, mechanical properties and drug delivery ability of bioactive glass-ceramic scaffolds coated with a natural-derived polymer. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;77:342–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Hasanzadeh R, Mihankhah P, Azdast T, Rasouli A, Shamkhali M, Park CB. Biocompatible tissue-engineered scaffold polymers for 3D printing and its application for 4D printing. Chem Eng J. 2023;476:146616. [Google Scholar]
- 76. Tilton M, Camilleri ET, Astudillo Potes MD, Gaihre B, Liu X, Lucien F, Elder BD, Lu L. Visible light-induced 3D bioprinted injectable scaffold for minimally invasive tissue regeneration. Biomater Adv. 2023;153:213539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Baysan G, Gunes OC, Turemis C, Yilmaz PA, Husemoglu RB, Ozenler AK, Perpelek M, Albayrak AZ, Havitcioglu H, Cecen B. Using loofah reinforced chitosan-collagen hydrogel based scaffolds in-vitro and in-vivo; healing in cartilage tissue defects. Materialia. 2023;31:101881. doi: 10.1016/j.mtla.2023.101881. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Ross MT, Kilian D, Lode A, Ren J, Allenby MC, Gelinsky M, Woodruff MA. Using melt-electrowritten microfibres for tailoring scaffold mechanics of 3D bioprinted chondrocyte-laden constructs. Bioprinting. 2021;23:00158. [Google Scholar]
- 79. Liu J, Wang R, Gong X, Zhu Y, Shen C, Zhu Z, Li Y, Li Z, Ren Z, Chen X, Bian W. Ti6Al4V biomimetic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Fabrication, biomechanics and osseointegration. Mater Des. 2023;234:112330. [Google Scholar]
- 80. Liu M, Wang Y, Wei Q, Ma X, Zhang K, Li X, Bao C, Du B. Topology optimization for reducing stress shielding in cancellous bone scaffold. Comput Struct. 2023;288:107132. [Google Scholar]
- 81. Bogala MR. Three-dimensional (3D) printing of hydroxyapatite-based scaffolds: a review. Bioprinting. 2022;28:e00244. [Google Scholar]
- 82. Anderson M, Dubey N, Bogie K, Cao C, Li J, Lerchbacker J, Mendonça G, Kauffmann F, Bottino MC, Kaigler D. Three-dimensional printing of clinical scale and personalized calcium phosphate scaffolds for alveolar bone reconstruction. Dent Mater. 2022;38(3):529–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Lin YH, Lee AK, Ho CC, Fang MJ, Kuo TY, Shie MY. The effects of a 3D-printed magnesium-/strontium-doped calcium silicate scaffold on regulation of bone regeneration via dual-stimulation of the AKT and WNT signaling pathways. Biomater Adv. 2022;133:112660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Yunsheng D, Hui X, Jie W, Tingting Y, Naiqi K, Jiaxing H, Wei C, Yufei L, Qiang Y, Shufang W. Sustained release silicon from 3D bioprinting scaffold using silk/gelatin inks to promote osteogenesis. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;234:123659. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Sestito JM, Harris TAL, Wang Y. Structural descriptor and surrogate modeling for design of biodegradable scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2024;152:106415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Moheb Afzali A, Kheradmand MA, Naghib SM. Bioreactor design-assisted bioprinting of stimuli-responsive materials for tissue engineering and drug delivery applications. Bioprinting. 2023;37:e00298. doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2023.e00325. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Cho YS, Ghim MS, Hong MW, Kim YY, Cho YS. Strategy to improve endogenous bone regeneration of 3D-printed PCL/nano-HA composite scaffold: Collagen designs with BMP-2 and FGF-2. Mater Des. 2023;229:111913. [Google Scholar]
- 88. Rahatuzzaman M, Mahmud M, Rahman S, Hoque ME. Design, fabrication, and characterization of 3D-printed ABS and PLA scaffolds potentially for tissue engineering. Results Eng. 2024;21:101685. [Google Scholar]
- 89. Chen H, Liu Y, Wang C, Zhang A, Chen B, Han Q, Wang J. Design and properties of biomimetic irregular scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Comput Biol Med. 2021;130:104241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Vaiani L, Uva AE, Boccaccio A. Structural and topological design of conformal bilayered scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Thin-Walled Struct. 2023;192:111209. [Google Scholar]
- 91. Shi ZZ, Gao XX, Zhang HJ, Liu XF, Li HY, Zhou C, Yin YX, Wang LN. Design biodegradable Zn alloys: second phases and their significant influences on alloy properties. Bioact Mater. 2020;5(2):210–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Cwieka K, Wysocki B, Skibinski J, Chmielewska A, Swieszkowski W. Numerical design of open-porous titanium scaffolds for Powder Bed Fusion using Laser Beam (PBF-LB). J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2024;151:106359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Luo Y, Zhang T, Lin X. 3D printed hydrogel scaffolds with macro pores and interconnected microchannel networks for tissue engineering vascularization. Chem Eng J. 2022;430:132926. [Google Scholar]
- 94. Zhang J, Chen X, Sun Y, Yang J, Chen R, Xiong Y, Hou W, Bai L. Design of a biomimetic graded TPMS scaffold with quantitatively adjustable pore size. Mater Des. 2022;218:110665. [Google Scholar]
- 95. Kennedy SM, Amudhan K, Robert RJ, Vasanthanathan A, Pandian AV. Experimental and finite element analysis on the effect of pores on bio-printed polycaprolactone bone scaffolds. Bioprinting. 2023;34:e00301. [Google Scholar]
- 96. Liu R, Ma L, Liu H, Xu B, Feng C, He R. Effects of pore size on the mechanical and biological properties of stereolithographic 3D printed HAp bioceramic scaffold. Ceram Int. 2021;47:28924–31. [Google Scholar]
- 97. Wang Q, Ye W, Ma Z, Xie W, Zhong L, Wang Y, Rong Q. 3D printed PCL/β-TCP cross-scale scaffold with high-precision fiber for providing cell growth and forming bones in the pores. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2021;127:112197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Ghosh S, Pati F. Decellularized extracellular matrix and silk fibroin-based hybrid biomaterials: a comprehensive review on fabrication techniques and tissue-specific applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;14:127410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Chang KT, Hung YH, Chiu ZY, Chang JY, Yen KT, Liu CY. Fabrication of elliptically constructed liquid crystalline elastomeric scaffolds for 3D artificial tissues. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2023;146:106056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Farazin A, Zhang C, Gheisizadeh A, Shahbazi A. 3D bio-printing for use as bone replacement tissues: a review of biomedical application. Biom Eng Adv. 2023;5:100075. [Google Scholar]
- 101. Maihemuti A, Zhang H, Lin X, Wang Y, Xu Z, Zhang D, Jiang Q. 3D-printed fish gelatin scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering. Bioact Mater. 2023;26:77–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Sagadevan S, Schirhagl R, Rahman MZ, Ismail MF, Lett JA, Fatimah I, Kaus NH, Oh WC. Recent advancements in polymer matrix nanocomposites for bone tissue engineering applications. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol. 2023;82:104313. [Google Scholar]
- 103. Zielińska A, Karczewski J, Eder P, Kolanowski T, Szalata M, Wielgus K, Szalata M, Kim D, Shin SR, Słomski R, Souto EB. Scaffolds for drug delivery and tissue engineering: The role of genetics. J Control Release. 2023;359:207–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Dong L, Li X, Leng W, Guo Z, Cai T, Ji X, Xu C, Zhu Z, Lin J. Adipose stem cells in tissue regeneration and repair: from bench to bedside. Regen Ther. 2023;24:547–60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Bharathi R, Ganesh SS, Harini G, Vatsala K, Anushikaa R, Aravind S, Abinaya S, Selvamurugan N. Chitosan-based scaffolds as drug delivery systems in bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;222:132–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Balasubramani V, Jeganathan R, Dinesh Kumar S. Numerical analysis of porosity effects on mechanical properties for tissue engineering scaffold. Mater Today Proc. 2023;30:124. [Google Scholar]
- 107. Eskandani M, Derakhshankhah H, Jahanban-Esfahlan R, Jaymand M. Biomimetic alginate-based electroconductive nanofibrous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering application. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;249:125991. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Janmohammadi M, Nazemi Z, Salehi AOM, Seyfoori A, John JV, Nourbakhsh MS, Akbari M. Cellulose-based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and localized drug delivery. Bioact Mater. 2023;20:137–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Browning AP, Maclaren OJ, Buenzli PR, Lanaro M, Allenby MC, Woodruff MA, Simpson MJ. Model-based data analysis of tissue growth in thin 3D printed scaffolds. J Theor Biol. 2021;528:110852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Sakthiabirami K, Kang JH, Jang JG, Soundharrajan V, Lim HP, Yun KD, Park C, Lee BN, Yang YP, Park SW. Hybrid porous zirconia scaffolds fabricated using additive manufacturing for bone tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2021;123:111950. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Liao J, Han R, Wu Y, Qian Z. Review of a new bone tumor therapy strategy based on bifunctional biomaterials. Bone Research. 2021;9:18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Kirillova A, Yeazel TR, Asheghali D, Petersen SR, Dort S, Gall K, Becker ML. Fabrication of biomedical scaffolds using biodegradable polymers. Chem Rev. 2021;121:11238–11304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113. Shanley LC, Mahon OR, Kelly DJ, Dunne A. Harnessing the innate and adaptive immune system for tissue repair and regeneration: considering more than macrophages. Acta Biomater. 2021;133:208–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. González SG, Vlad MD, López JL, Aguado EF. Novel bio-inspired 3D porous scaffold intended for bone-tissue engineering: design and in silico characterisation of histomorphometric, mechanical and mass-transport properties. Mater Des. 2023;225:111467. [Google Scholar]
- 115. Ma H, Jiang C, Zhai D, Luo Y, Chen Y, Lv F, Yi Z, Deng Y, Wang J, Chang J, Wu C. A bifunctional biomaterial with photothermal effect for tumor therapy and bone regeneration. Adv Funct Mater. 2016;26:1197–1208. [Google Scholar]
- 116. Yu GU, Chao CH, Wang QB, Min LI, Cao YK, Pan YM, Tan LM. Effect of porosity on mechanical properties of porous tantalum scaffolds produced by electron beam powder bed fusion. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China. 2022;32:2922–34. [Google Scholar]
- 117. Singh N, Batra U, Kumar K, Ahuja N, Mahapatro A. Progress in bioactive surface coatings on biodegradable Mg alloys: a critical review towards clinical translation. Bioact Mater. 2023;19:717–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Shi ZZ, Gao XX, Chen HT, Liu XF, Li A, Zhang HJ, Wang LN. Enhancement in mechanical and corrosion resistance properties of a biodegradable Zn-Fe alloy through second phase refinement. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2020;116:111197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Bakhtiari H, Nouri A, Khakbiz M, Tolouei-Rad M. Fatigue behaviour of load-bearing polymeric bone scaffolds: a review. Acta Biomater. 2023;172:16–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Salman M, Schmauder S. Multiscale modeling of shape memory polymers foams nanocomposites. Comput Mater Sci. 2024;232:112658. [Google Scholar]
- 121. Zhang C, Cai D, Liao P, Su JW, Deng H, Vardhanabhuti B, Ulery BD, Chen SY, Lin J. 4D printing of shape-memory polymeric scaffolds for adaptive biomedical implantation. Acta Biomater. 2021;122:101–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Gomes A, Teixeira C, Ferraz R, Prudêncio C, Gomes P. Wound-healing peptides for treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers and other infected skin injuries. Molecules. 2017;22:1743. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Deptuła M, Zawrzykraj M, Sawicka J, Banach-Kopeć A, Tylingo R, Pikuła M. Application of 3D- printed hydrogels in wound healing and regenerative medicine. Biomed Pharmacother. 2023;167:115416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Yang Z, Ren X, Liu Y. N-halamine modified ceria nanoparticles: antibacterial response and accelerated wound healing application via a 3D printed scaffold. Compos B Eng. 2021;227:109390. [Google Scholar]
- 125. Liu C, Wang Z, Wei X, Chen B, Luo Y. 3D printed hydrogel/PCL core/shell fiber scaffolds with NIR-triggered drug release for cancer therapy and wound healing. Acta Biomater. 2021;131:314–25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Wang S, Zhang Y, Shi Y, He Q, Tan Q, Peng Z, Liu Y, Li D, Li X, Ke D, Wang J. Rhubarb charcoal-crosslinked chitosan/silk fibroin sponge scaffold with efficient hemostasis, inflammation, and angiogenesis for promoting diabetic wound healing. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;253:126796. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Haki M, Shamloo A, Eslami SS, Mir-Mohammad-Sadeghi F, Maleki S, Hajizadeh A. Fabrication and characterization of an antibacterial chitosan-coated allantoin-loaded NaCMC/SA skin scaffold for wound healing applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;253:127051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Cakmak HY, Ege H, Yilmaz S, Agturk G, Dal Yontem F, Enguven G, Sarmis A, Cakmak Z, Gunduz O, Ege ZR. 3D printed styrax liquidus (Liquidambar orientalis Miller)-loaded poly (L-lactic acid)/chitosan based wound dressing material: fabrication, characterization, and biocompatibility results. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;248:125835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Lv K, Zhu J, Zheng S, Jiao Z, Nie Y, Song F, Liu T, Song K. Evaluation of inhibitory effects of geniposide on a tumor model of human breast cancer based on 3D printed Cs/Gel hybrid scaffold. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2021;119:111509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Li Z, Shi ZZ, Hao Y, Li HF, Zhang HJ, Liu XF, Wang LN. Insight into role and mechanism of Li on the key aspects of biodegradable Zn[sbnd]Li alloys: Microstructure evolution, mechanical properties, corrosion behavior and cytotoxicity. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;114:111049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131. Liu L, Meng Y, Volinsky AA, Zhang HJ, Wang LN. Influences of albumin on in vitro corrosion of pure Zn in artificial plasma. Corros Sci. 2019;153:341–56. [Google Scholar]
- 132. Lan X, Liang Y, Vyhlidal M, Erkut EJ, Kunze M, Mulet-Sierra A, Osswald M, Ansari K, Seikaly H, Boluk Y, Adesida AB. In vitro maturation and in vivo stability of bioprinted human nasal cartilage. J Tissue Eng. 2022;13:20417314221086368. doi: 10.1177/20417314221086368. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Beketov EE, Isaeva EV, Yakovleva ND, Demyashkin GA, Arguchinskaya NV, Kisel AA, Lagoda TS, Malakhov EP, Kharlov VI, Osidak EO, Domogatsky SP. Bioprinting of cartilage with bioink based on high-concentration collagen and chondrocytes. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:11351. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Liu X, Hao M, Chen Z, Zhang T, Huang J, Dai J, Zhang Z. 3D bioprinted neural tissue constructs for spinal cord injury repair. Biomaterials. 2021;272:120771. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Wang H, Zhang J, Liu H, Wang Z, Li G, Liu Q, Wang C. Chondrocyte-laden gelatin/sodium alginate hydrogel integrating 3D printed PU scaffold for auricular cartilage reconstruction. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;253:126294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Bejleri D, Robeson MJ, Brown ME, Hunter J, Maxwell JT, Streeter BW, Brazhkina O, Park HJ, Christman KL, Davis ME. In vivo evaluation of bioprinted cardiac patches composed of cardiac-specific extracellular matrix and progenitor cells in a model of pediatric heart failure. Biomater Sci. 2022;10:444–56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Noor N, Shapira A, Edri R, Gal I, Wertheim L, Dvir T. 3D printing of personalized thick and perfusable cardiac patches and hearts. Advanced Science. 2019;6:1900344. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Cuvellier M, Rose S, Ezan F, Jarry U, de Oliveira H, Bruyère A, La Rochelle CD, Legagneux V, Langouët S, Baffet G. In vitro long term differentiation and functionality of three-dimensional bioprinted primary human hepatocytes: application for in vivo engraftment. Biofabrication. 2022;14:035021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139. Liu S, Yang H, Chen D, Xie Y, Tai C, Wang L, Wang P, Wang B. Three-dimensional bioprinting sodium alginate/gelatin scaffold combined with neural stem cells and oligodendrocytes markedly promoting nerve regeneration after spinal cord injury. Regen Biomater. 2022;9:rbac038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Li J, Lai Y, Li M, Chen X, Zhou M, Wang W, Li J, Cui W, Zhang G, Wang K, Liu L. Repair of infected bone defect with Clindamycin-Tetrahedral DNA nanostructure Complex-loaded 3D bioprinted hybrid scaffold. Chem Eng J. 2022;435:134855. [Google Scholar]
- 141. Wu J, Jiao C, Yu H, Liang H, Zhao J, Tian Z, Wang C, Wang D, Shen L. A tailored hydroxyapatite/magnesium silicate 3D composite scaffold: Mechanical, degradation, and bioactivity properties. Ceram Int. 2023;49:35438–47. [Google Scholar]
- 142. Pecci R, Baiguera S, Ioppolo P, Bedini R, Del Gaudio C. 3D printed scaffolds with random microarchitecture for bone tissue engineering applications: manufacturing and characterization. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020;103:103583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143. Iviglia G, Cassinelli C, Bollati D, Baino F, Torre E, Morra M, Vitale-Brovarone C. Engineered porous scaffolds for periprosthetic infection prevention. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;68:701–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144. Cheng S, Zhang D, Li M, Liu X, Zhang Y, Qian S, Peng F. Osteogenesis, angiogenesis and immune response of Mg-Al layered double hydroxide coating on pure Mg. Bioact Mater. 2021;6(1):91–105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145. Soleymani S, Naghib SM. 3D and 4D printing hydroxyapatite-based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and regeneration. Heliyon. 2023;9(9):e19363. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146. Zhang D, George OJ, Petersen KM, Jimenez-Vergara AC, Hahn MS, Grunlan MA. A bioactive “self-fitting” shape memory polymer scaffold with potential to treat cranio-maxillo facial bone defects. Acta Biomater. 2014;10(11):4597–4605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147. Mohapatra D, Behera DR, Mishra DK. Prospective of functionalized graphene as shape memory and self-healing polymer: a review. Mater Today Proc. Epub 2023 Jul 7. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.06.389. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 148. Podgórski R, Wojasi’nski MW, Ciach T. Pushing boundaries in 3D printing: Economic pressure filament extruder for producing polymeric and polymer-ceramic filaments for 3D printers. HardwareX. 2023;16:e00486. doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/X3FZN. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149. Mobarak MH, Islam MA, Hossain N, Al Mahmud MZ, Rayhan MT, Nishi NJ, Chowdhury MA. Recent advances of additive manufacturing in implant fabrication—a review. Appl Surf Sci 2023;18:100462. [Google Scholar]
- 150. Kazemi Asl S, Rahimzadegan M, Ostadrahimi R. The recent advancement in the chitosan hybrid-based scaffolds for cardiac regeneration after myocardial infarction. Carbohydrate Polymers. 2023;300:120266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151. Almeida PHT, Cacciacane SH, Junior AA. TEN-YEAR follow-up of treatment with zygomatic implants and replacement of hybrid dental prosthesis by ceramic teeth: a case report. Ann Med Surg. 2020;50:1–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152. Shuai C, Feng P, Wu P, Liu Y, Liu X, Lai D, Gao C, Peng S. A combined nanostructure constructed by graphene and boron nitride nanotubes reinforces ceramic scaffolds. Chem Eng J. 2017;313:487–97. [Google Scholar]
- 153. Lee SY, Kim JH, Yi SS, Yeo HG, Lee Y, Hwang Y, Lee JW. Systematic evaluation of antibiotic activity of a cefazolin-loaded scaffold with varying 3D printing temperatures and its application in treating osteomyelitis. J Ind Eng Chem. 2023;124:539–49. [Google Scholar]
- 154. Khan AR, Zheng M, Cui Y, Zhang H. Protection properties of organosilane-epoxy coating on Al Alloy 6101 in alkaline solution. Surf Eng and App Electrochem. 2022;58:281–89. [Google Scholar]
- 155. Chang FC, James MM, Qassab AM, Zhou Y, Ando Y, Shi M, Zhang M. 3D chitosan scaffolds support expansion of human neural stem cells in chemically defined condition. Matter. 2023;6:3631–60. [Google Scholar]
- 156. Xu J, Fang H, Su Y, Kang Y, Xu D, Cheng YY, Nie Y, Wang H, Liu T, Song K. A 3D bioprinted decellularized extracellular matrix/gelatin/quaternized chitosan scaffold assembling with poly(ionic liquid)s for skin tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;220:1253–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157. Kumar KS, Kritika S, Karthikeyan NS, Sujatha V, Mahalaxmi S, Ravichandran C. Development of cobalt-incorporated chitosan scaffold for regenerative potential in human dental pulp stem cells: an in vitro study. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;253:126574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158. Li P, Fu L, Liao Z, Peng Y, Ning C, Gao C, Zhang D, Sui X, Lin Y, Liu S, Hao C, et al. Chitosan hydrogel/3D-printed poly(ε-caprolactone) hybrid scaffold containing synovial mesenchymal stem cells for cartilage regeneration based on tetrahedral framework nucleic acid recruitment. Biomaterials. 2021;278:121131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159. Nedunchezian S, Banerjee P, Lee CY, Lee SS, Lin CW, Wu CW, Wu SC, Chang JK, Wang CK. Generating adipose stem cell-laden hyaluronic acid-based scaffolds using 3D bioprinting via the double crosslinked strategy for chondrogenesis. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2021;124:112072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160. Zhong Y, Ma H, Lu Y, Cao L, Cheng YY, Tang X, Sun H, Song K. Investigation on repairing diabetic foot ulcer based on 3D bio-printing Gel/dECM/Qcs composite scaffolds. Tissue Cell. 2023;85:102213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161. Islam M, Sadaf A, Gómez MR, Mager D, Korvink JG, Lantada AD. Carbon fiber/microlattice 3D hybrid architecture as multi-scale scaffold for tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2021;126:112140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 162. Young G, Tallia F, Clark JN, Chellappan M, Gavalda-Diaz O, Alcocer EJ, Ferreira SA, Rankin SM, Clark JP, Hanna JV, Jeffers JR. Hybrid materials with continuous mechanical property gradients that can be 3D printed. Mater Today Adv. 2023;17:100344. [Google Scholar]
- 163. Liu X, Miao Y, Liang H, Diao J, Hao L, Shi Z, Zhao N, Wang Y. 3D-printed bioactive ceramic scaffolds with biomimetic micro/nano-HAp surfaces mediated cell fate and promoted bone augmentation of the bone–implant interface in vivo. Bioact Mater. 2022;12:120–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 164. Gao Q, Xie C, Wang P, Xie M, Li H, Sun A, Fu J, He Y. 3D printed multi-scale scaffolds with ultrafine fibers for providing excellent biocompatibility. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2020;107:110269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 165. Liu Z, Zhang M, Wang Z, Wang Y, Dong W, Ma W, Zhao S, Sun D. 3D-printed porous PEEK scaffold combined with CSMA/POSS bioactive surface: a strategy for enhancing osseointegration of PEEK implants. Compos B Eng. 2022;230:109512. [Google Scholar]
- 166. Kivijärvi T, Goksøyr Ø, Yassin MA, Jain S, Yamada S, Morales-López A, Mustafa K, Finne-Wistrand A. Hybrid material based on hyaluronan hydrogels and poly(L-lactide-co-1,3-trimethylene carbonate) scaffolds toward a cell-instructive microenvironment with long-term in vivo degradability. Mater Today Bio. 2022;17:100483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 167. Topsakal A, Midha S, Yuca E, Tukay A, Sasmazel HT, Kalaskar DM, Gunduz O. Study on the cytocompatibility, mechanical and antimicrobial properties of 3D printed composite scaffolds based on PVA/ Gold nanoparticles (AuNP)/ Ampicillin (AMP) for bone tissue engineering. Mater Today Commun. 2021;28:102458. [Google Scholar]
- 168. Grewal NS, Batra U, Kumar K, Mahapatro A. Novel PA encapsulated PCL hybrid coating for corrosion inhibition of biodegradable Mg alloys: a triple triggered self-healing response for synergistic multiple protection. J Magnes Alloys. 2023;11:1440–60. [Google Scholar]
- 169. Khan AR, Altalbe A. Potential impacts of Russo-Ukraine conflict and its psychological consequences among Ukrainian adults: the post-COVID-19 era. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1280423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 170. Khan AR, Grewal NS, Zhou C, Kunshan Y, Zhang HJ, Jun Z. Recent advances in biodegradable metals for implant applications: Exploring in vivo and in vitro responses. Results in Engineering; 20. Epub Ahead of Print 1 December. 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101526. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 171. Khan AR, Zhao T, Zheng M. Composite fabrication of epoxy and graphene oxide coating to enrich the anticorrosion and thermal properties of carbon-steel. Surf Rev Lett. 2022;29:2250072. [Google Scholar]
- 172. Zhao L, Yu R, He Y, Zhang M, Tian F, Wang L, Zhao Y, Huang W. 3D printed epoxy/acrylate hybrid polymers with excellent mechanical and shape memory properties via UV and thermal cationic dual-curing mechanism. Addit Manuf. 2024;79:103904. [Google Scholar]
- 173. Gréant C, Van Durme B, Van Damme L, Brancart J, Van Hoorick J, Van Vlierberghe S. Digital light processing of poly(ε-caprolactone)-based resins into porous shape memory scaffolds. Eur Polym J. 2023;195:112225. [Google Scholar]
- 174. Baker RM, Tseng LF, Iannolo MT, Oest ME, Henderson JH. Self-deploying shape memory polymer scaffolds for grafting and stabilizing complex bone defects: a mouse femoral segmental defect study. Biomaterials. 2016;76:388–98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 175. Arif ZU, Khalid MY, Tariq A, Hossain M, Umer R. 3D printing of stimuli-responsive hydrogel materials: Literature review and emerging applications. Giant. 2024;17:100209. doi: 10.1016/j.giant.2023.100209. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 176. Pandey H, Mohol SS, Kandi R. 4D printing of tracheal scaffold using shape-memory polymer composite. Mater Lett. 2022;329:133238. [Google Scholar]
- 177. Ma B, Zhang Y, Li J, Chen D, Liang R, Fu S, Li D. 4D printing of multi-stimuli responsive rigid smart composite materials with self-healing ability. Chem Eng J. 2023;466:143420. [Google Scholar]
- 178. Khalaj R, Tabriz AG, Okereke MI, Douroumis D. 3D printing advances in the development of stents. Int J Pharm. 2021;609:121153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 179. Wang Z, Han L, Zhou Y, Cai J, Sun S, Ma J, Wang W, Li X, Ma L. The combination of a 3D-Printed porous Ti–6Al–4V alloy scaffold and stem cell sheet technology for the construction of biomimetic engineered bone at an ectopic site. Mater Today Bio. 2022;16:100433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 180. Foroughi AH, Liu D, Razavi MJ. Simultaneous optimization of stiffness, permeability, and surface area in metallic bone scaffolds. Int J Eng Sci. 2023;193:103961. [Google Scholar]
- 181. Dave K, Mahmud Z, Gomes VG. Superhydrophilic 3D-printed scaffolds using conjugated bioresorbable nanocomposites for enhanced bone regeneration. Chem Eng J. 2022;445:136639. [Google Scholar]