journal article·2018-07-27

Alginate-honey bioinks with improved cell responses for applications as bioprinted tissue engineered constructs

Sudipto Datta, Ripon Sarkar, Veena Vyas, Sumant Bhutoria, Ananya Barui, Amit Roy Chowdhury, Pallab Datta

Journal of Materials Research· Volume 33· Issue 14
Publisher page

Abstract

The polysaccharide alginate has received most extensive attention as bioink in bioprinting applications due to its ability to undergo gelation under cell-friendly conditions. However, absence of cell-binding motifs and the erratic degradation of alginate hydrogels have remained their persistent limitations. Honey is a conveniently available natural material, known for its role in wound healing and skin tissue regeneration. However, honey blending to improve biological response of alginate-based bioprinted scaffolds has not been yet reported. In the present work, honey-alginate bioinks were evaluated for their printability property (shape fidelity). It was found that honey blending reduced alginate viscosity, which gradually affected bioprinting fidelity. Therefore, the concentration that provides for acceptable bioprinting along with improvement in cell proliferations is determined. It is concluded that honey blending improves cell response of alginate bioinks and can be a facile approach to obtain bioinks especially for in situ skin tissue engineering applications.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Innovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (53)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.jtv.2015.12.00210.1016/j.jtv.2015.12.002 ↗
2. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05270.x10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05270.x ↗
3. Preliminary investigation and characterization of electrospun polycaprolactone and manuka honey scaffolds for dermal repair
4. 10.1155/2017/484306510.1155/2017/4843065 ↗
5. Mechanical characterisation of hydrogels for tissue engineering applications
6. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.04.01310.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.04.013 ↗
7. 10.1039/c3bm00012e10.1039/c3bm00012e ↗
8. 10.1186/s12896-015-0147-710.1186/s12896-015-0147-7 ↗
9. 10.1371/journal.pone.011893710.1371/journal.pone.0118937 ↗
10. Repositing honey incorporated electrospun nanofiber membranes to provide anti-oxidant, anti-bacterial and anti-inflammatory microenvironment for wound regeneration
11. 10.1088/1758-5090/8/3/03502010.1088/1758-5090/8/3/035020 ↗
12. 10.1038/s41598-018-21274-410.1038/s41598-018-21274-4 ↗
13. 10.1111/wrr.1229710.1111/wrr.12297 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.msec.2017.03.27210.1016/j.msec.2017.03.272 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.12.05110.1016/j.carbpol.2014.12.051 ↗
16. 10.1007/s13770-012-0036-210.1007/s13770-012-0036-2 ↗
17. 10.1007/s40257-016-0247-810.1007/s40257-016-0247-8 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.burns.2013.06.01410.1016/j.burns.2013.06.014 ↗
19. 10.1007/s12195-008-0014-x10.1007/s12195-008-0014-x ↗
20. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.05010.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.050 ↗
21. 10.1371/journal.pone.018290210.1371/journal.pone.0182902 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.08.00310.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.08.003 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.04.00610.1016/j.drudis.2016.04.006 ↗
24. Research on the printability of hydrogels in 3D bioprinting
25. 10.1002/adhm.20170026410.1002/adhm.201700264 ↗
26. 10.1186/s41038-017-0104-x10.1186/s41038-017-0104-x ↗
27. 10.1016/j.wndm.2017.06.00310.1016/j.wndm.2017.06.003 ↗
28. 10.1002/adhm.20170029810.1002/adhm.201700298 ↗
29. 10.1038/s41598-017-05699-x10.1038/s41598-017-05699-x ↗
30. 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b0015810.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00158 ↗
31. 10.1002/biot.20160067110.1002/biot.201600671 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.11.06910.1016/j.carbpol.2011.11.069 ↗
33. 10.1088/1758-5090/aa90e210.1088/1758-5090/aa90e2 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.msec.2016.10.06910.1016/j.msec.2016.10.069 ↗
35. 10.1088/1758-5090/8/3/03200210.1088/1758-5090/8/3/032002 ↗
36. 10.1002/biot.20090000410.1002/biot.200900004 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.06.03410.1016/j.actbio.2014.06.034 ↗
38. 10.1039/C4RA05799F10.1039/C4RA05799F ↗
39. 10.1016/j.matlet.2016.12.00910.1016/j.matlet.2016.12.009 ↗
40. 10.1088/1758-5090/9/1/01500610.1088/1758-5090/9/1/015006 ↗
41. 10.1038/srep2447410.1038/srep24474 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.05.02510.1016/j.actbio.2017.05.025 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.01810.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.018 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.wndm.2014.09.00310.1016/j.wndm.2014.09.003 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.12.00610.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.12.006 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.06.19810.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.06.198 ↗
47. 10.1002/jbm.b.3400210.1002/jbm.b.34002 ↗
48. 10.1111/wrr.1211710.1111/wrr.12117 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.01810.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.018 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.07610.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.076 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.04.08010.1016/j.carbpol.2016.04.080 ↗
52. 10.1038/s41598-017-08771-810.1038/s41598-017-08771-8 ↗
53. Williams · 2015 · 1