Table 2.
Microsphere sintering method | Process parameters that influence scaffold properties | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | Temperature Duration | Simple method; does not require complex apparatus Generally utilizes moderate temperatures Offers flexible time constraints Multiple scaffolds can be fabricated at once |
May require high temperatures or longer durations May result in loss of bioactivity of encapsulated factors |
20, 33, 52, 90 |
Solvent vapor | Duration Solvent composition Scaffold mass |
Can sinter microspheres quickly Allows for inclusion of bioactive factors |
Strict time constraints Residual solvent toxicity |
69, 70 |
Weak solvent | Duration Solvent composition |
Allows for inclusion of bioactive factors Moderate time constraints Less concern of residual solvent toxicity as a mild solvent is employed |
Longer sintering durations compared with solvent vapor method | 48, 61, 72, 74 |
Solvent/nonsolvent | Solution composition Duration | Can be used for a wide range of materials Allows for preloading of bioactive molecules |
Requires large amounts of solvent Residual solvent toxicity |
44, 80, 81 |
Subcritical CO2 | CO2 pressure Duration Rate of depressurization Temperature (only if necessary) |
Straightforward one-step method May be used to create shape-specific scaffolds Allows for simultaneous cell seeding Benign process Does not require extra washing steps Low environmental impact |
May not be cytocompatible at high CO2 pressures Shear forces may harm concurrently seeded cells |
84–86 |
Selective laser | Laser power Scan spacing Layer thickness |
Fabrication of patient-specific grafts Reproducible method with fast manufacture speed May be utilized for regeneration of complex tissues Free of toxic solvents Excellent controllability over scaffold architecture Macroporous architecture (not limited to stacking) |
Large quantities of raw materials are required Logistically challenging Expensive |
32, 88 |