Optimising the biocompatibility of 3D printed photopolymer constructs in vitro and in vivo
- PMID: 30795002
- DOI: 10.1088/1748-605X/ab09c4
Optimising the biocompatibility of 3D printed photopolymer constructs in vitro and in vivo
Abstract
3D printing is a rapid and accessible fabrication technology that engenders creative custom design solutions for cell scaffolds, perfusion systems and cell culture systems for tissue engineering. Critical to its success is the biocompatibility of the materials used, which should allow long-term tissue culture without affecting cell viability or inducing an inflammatory response for in vitro and in vivo applications. Polyjet 3D printers offer arguably the highest resolution with the fewest design constraints of any commercially available 3D printing systems. Although widely used for rapid-prototyping of medical devices and 3D anatomical modelling, polyjet printing has not been adopted by the tissue engineering field, largely due to the cytotoxicity of leachates from the printed parts. Biocompatibility in the context of cell culture is not commonly addressed for polyjet materials, as they tend to be optimised for their ability to fabricate complex structures. In order to study the potential issues surrounding the leaching of toxins, we prepared cell culture substrates using the commercially available MED610 photopolymer. The substrates were cleaned using either the manufacturer-specified 'biocompatible' washing procedures, or a novel protocol incorporating a sonication in isopropanol and water step. We then compared the effectiveness of these both in vitro and in vivo. Using primary mouse myoblast cultures, the manufacturer's protocol led to inconsistent and poorer cell viability when compared to the sonication protocol (p = 0.0002 at 48 h after indirect exposure). Subdermal implantation of MED610 into nude rats demonstrated a significant foreign body response with a greater number of giant cells (p = 0.0161) and foreign bodies (p = 0.0368) when compared to the sonication protocol, which was comparable to the control (sham) groups. These results present an improved, cytocompatible cleaning protocol of printable photopolymers to facilitate creative 3D-printed custom designs for cell culture systems for both in vitro and in vivo tissue engineering applications.
Similar articles
-
Hybrid printing of mechanically and biologically improved constructs for cartilage tissue engineering applications.Biofabrication. 2013 Mar;5(1):015001. doi: 10.1088/1758-5082/5/1/015001. Epub 2012 Nov 21. Biofabrication. 2013. PMID: 23172542
-
Three-dimensional printing: The potential technology widely used in medical fields.J Biomed Mater Res A. 2020 Nov 1;108(11):2217-2229. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.36979. Epub 2020 Jun 20. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2020. PMID: 32363725 Review.
-
Polymer structure-property requirements for stereolithographic 3D printing of soft tissue engineering scaffolds.Biomaterials. 2017 Sep;140:170-188. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.06.005. Epub 2017 Jun 6. Biomaterials. 2017. PMID: 28651145 Review.
-
3D printing of functional biomaterials for tissue engineering.Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016 Aug;40:103-112. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2016.03.014. Epub 2016 Apr 1. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016. PMID: 27043763 Review.
-
Reversible physical crosslinking strategy with optimal temperature for 3D bioprinting of human chondrocyte-laden gelatin methacryloyl bioink.J Biomater Appl. 2018 Nov;33(5):609-618. doi: 10.1177/0885328218805864. Epub 2018 Oct 25. J Biomater Appl. 2018. PMID: 30360677
Cited by
-
Evaluation and optimization of PolyJet 3D-printed materials for cell culture studies.Anal Bioanal Chem. 2022 May;414(11):3329-3339. doi: 10.1007/s00216-022-03991-y. Epub 2022 Mar 11. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2022. PMID: 35274156 Free PMC article.
-
Rapid Fabrication of Sterile Medical Nasopharyngeal Swabs by Stereolithography for Widespread Testing in a Pandemic.Adv Eng Mater. 2020 Nov;22(11):2000759. doi: 10.1002/adem.202000759. Epub 2020 Oct 21. Adv Eng Mater. 2020. PMID: 33173409 Free PMC article.
-
Three-Dimensional Printed Devices in Droplet Microfluidics.Micromachines (Basel). 2019 Nov 4;10(11):754. doi: 10.3390/mi10110754. Micromachines (Basel). 2019. PMID: 31690055 Free PMC article. Review.
-
3D Printing of Cell Culture Devices: Assessment and Prevention of the Cytotoxicity of Photopolymers for Stereolithography.Materials (Basel). 2020 Jul 6;13(13):3011. doi: 10.3390/ma13133011. Materials (Basel). 2020. PMID: 32640644 Free PMC article.
-
Parylene C Coating Efficacy Studies: Enhancing Biocompatibility of 3D Printed Polyurethane Parts for Biopharmaceutical and CGT Applications.ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2024 Aug 19;7(8):5369-5381. doi: 10.1021/acsabm.4c00561. Epub 2024 Jul 23. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2024. PMID: 39041651 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources