Table 1.

Comparison of micropatterning techniques used with endothelial cells

General method	References	Approx. resolution	Advantages	Disadvantages
Soft lithography	Many1,5-7,10,13,17,19-23,25,27,28,30,31,39,42,45,46,51,53,54,63,66-69,71,76-86,88	1-2μm	Inexpensive (after mask is created) High resolution Readily available Commonly used Option for topographical or biochemical features	Repeatability Difficult to adapt to large, 3D surfaces Difficult and time consuming to do complex patterns (requires multiple layers/applications)
Photochemistry	Many2,3,8,16,18,33-38,40,43,47,48,50,55-58,62,65,70,74,92	2-8μm	Very flexible Reproducible High resolution Large surface area “All-in-one” systems exist	Often uses specialized equipment/set up Requires photosensitive material Difficult to avoid some topographical features (on the order of tens of nm)
Inkjet printing	Gauvreau et al.26	30-100μm	Computer-aided so it is flexible and reproducible Simple, inexpensive instrumentation Fast Can use multiple biomolecules at one time	Low resolution Difficult to adapt to large, 3D surfaces
Laser bioprinting	Guillemot et al.29	1-5μm	Flexible, complex patterns Reproducible Fast Can pattern cells and biomaterials	Specialized system Expensive
Laser guided direct writing	Nahmias et al.59	10μm	Can directly pattern cells Uses arbitrary patterns and surfaces (including gels)	Requires special instrumentation Expensive Slow Requires round 3D structures (cells, beads, etc)
Microscale direct writing	Huang et al.32	6-9μm	Precise computer control Large area Multiple components Multiple patterns of varying size and shape	Requires special, expensive instrumentation (AFM) Slow Best for circular and repeating designs Patterns based on dots--max diameter of 60μm