Table 1.
Natural* , ** | Pro | Contra | |
---|---|---|---|
(Glyco)proteins | Fibrin |
‐ Injectable ‐ Suitable for bioprinting ‐ High elasticity ‐ High stability ‐ Cell adhesive sequence*** |
Mechanically weak |
Silk fibroin |
‐ Outlasts structural integrity of Fibrin and collagen ‐ Controllable mechanical properties ‐ Suitable for bioprinting, mixture with gelatin ‐ Stiffness comparable to brain tissue |
Adhesive properties have to be added | |
Fibronectin |
‐ Cell adhesion properties *** ‐ Ability to sequester nutrients and growth factors ‐ Produced by patients own cells ‐ Used as a coating of synthetic polymers |
||
Laminin |
‐ Injectable ‐ No need for gelation initiator ‐ Cell adhesive sequence both RGD and IKVAV*** |
||
Collagen |
‐ Injectable ‐ Cell adhesive sequence*** ‐ Successful in microfluidic systems |
Harmful cell encapsulation conditions | |
Matrigel™ |
‐ Injectable ‐ Approved commercial product ‐ Several ECM proteins and growth factors present ‐ cell adhesion properties |
Harmful cell encapsulation conditions | |
Polysaccharides | Hyaluronic acid |
‐ Adds compression strength, lubrication, and hydration to ECM ‐ injectable ‐ Control of permeability by methacrylation ‐ Stiffness comparable to brain tissue ‐ Stimulates angiogenesis |
No cell adhesion motifs |
Alginate |
‐ Injectable ‐ Suitable for bioprinting |
‐ No cell adhesion motifs ‐ Variable 3D structure ‐ Nonphysiological conditions during gelation |
|
Chitosan |
‐ Antimicrobial anti‐inflammatory ‐ Physiological cell encapsulation conditions when modified |
‐ No cell adhesion motifs ‐ Poor solubility |
Background information is indicated by symbols.
In almost all natural polymers there is a potential risk of pathogen transmission, because most of them are derived from animal sources.
Most natural polymers are subject to batch‐to‐batch variation, inhomogeneity and they are easily degraded in a physiological environment.
RGD adhesive motif may not always be exposed for integrin binding, this depends on the protein conformation (Bellis, 2011).