Table 1.

Common Biomaterials Used to Mimic Aortic Valve Architecture

	Type	Roles	Pros	Cons
Coll I	Native	Provides mechanical support Regulates VIC phenotype Abundant throughout valve; increases in late disease	Easy to fabricate gels Provides fibrillar topography Well established for VICs	Gels typically weak, easily contracted by VICs Difficult to tune properties across wide range
HA and HAMA	Native and Native - Modified	Supports healthy VIC phenotype Abundant in spongiosa; increases in early disease	No higher order structure to maintain Multiple possible crosslinking approaches Easy synthesis and gelation Tunable mechanical properties	Typically used in conjunction with adhesive elements HA must be modified (e.g., HAMA) to form scaffolds
Elastin	Native	Enables recoil of valve Fragments/decreases in late disease	Can use self-assembling elastin-like polypeptides to form gels Supports culture of VICs and VECs	Uncommon to use full protein; hydrophobicity introduces scaffold fabrication challenges Induces VIC calcification
GelMA	Native - Modified	Denatured form of collagen with enhanced crosslinking abilities	Tunable stiffness across wide range Easily modified and synthesized Can combine with other polymers (e.g., HAMA)	Does not contain fibrillar elements
PEG	Synthetic	Used as base for many reductionist approaches	Easy to modify with tunable properties Modified to contain adhesive and degradation targets Amenable to spatial patterning and temporal regulation	Not found in native valve Does not contain fibrillar elements