Progress in 3D printing for bone tissue engineering: a review
Source abstract
Abstract
Effective clinical methods for large bone defects are not yet available on account of the complex intrinsic structure and mechanical characteristics of natural bone tissue. It remains a challenge to restore bone damage to its original form by tissue engineering. With the continuous development of three-dimensional (3D) printing in recent years, the emergence of new technical supports and material innovations has established the foundation for bone tissue engineering (BTE). 3D printing has significant advantages for personalized treatment, as it allows for the specific fabrication of scaffolds with appropriate size, shape and intrinsic structural characteristics via patients’ computerized axial tomography scan or magnetic resonance imaging. In this review, we first systematically reviewed the development of 3D printing, printing methods and the selection of printing inks, then focused on the application of high-strength hydrogels in 3D printing for BTE. A brief anticipation of the future development of 3D printing was presented.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Marrella A, Lee TY, Lee DH et al (2018) Engineering vascularized and innervated bone biomaterials for improved skeletal tissue regeneration. Mater Today 21(4):362–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2017.10.00510.1016/j.mattod.2017.10.005 ↗
2. Zhang T, Wei Q, Zhou H et al (2021) Three-dimensional-printed individualized porous implants: a new “implant-bone” interface fusion concept for large bone defect treatment. Bioactive Mater 6:3659–3670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.03.03010.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.03.030 ↗
3. Nie L, Chen D, Suo J et al (2012) Physicochemical characterization and biocompatibility in vitro of biphasic calcium phosphate/polyvinyl alcohol scaffolds prepared by freeze-drying method for bone tissue engineering applications. colloids and surfaces. B Biointerfaces 100:169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2012.04.04610.1016/j.colsurfb.2012.04.046 ↗
4. Zhang Z, Jia B, Han Y et al (2021) Biodegradable ZnLiCa ternary alloys for critical-sized bone defect regeneration at load-bearing sites: in vitro and in vivo studies. Bioactive Mater 6:3999–4013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.03.04510.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.03.045 ↗
5. Swanson W, Zhang Z, Xiu K et al (2020) Scaffolds with controlled release of pro-mineralization exosomes to promote craniofacial bone healing without cell transplantation. Acta Biomater 118:215–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2020.09.05210.1016/j.actbio.2020.09.052 ↗
6. Shi R, Huang Y, Ma C et al (2018) Current advances for bone regeneration based on tissue engineering strategies. Front Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-018-0629-910.1007/s11684-018-0629-9 ↗
7. Ratheesh G, Vaquette C, Xiao Y (2020) Patient‐specific bone particles bioprinting for bone tissue engineering. Adv Healthc Mater 9(23):2001323. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20200132310.1002/adhm.202001323 ↗
8. Lin K-F, He S, Song Y et al (2016) Low-temperature additive manufacturing of biomimic three-dimensional hydroxyapatite/collagen scaffolds for bone regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(11):6905–6916. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b0081510.1021/acsami.6b00815 ↗
9. Jose M, Thomas V, Johnson K et al (2008) Aligned PLGA/HA nanofibrous nanocomposite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 5:305–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2008.07.01910.1016/j.actbio.2008.07.019 ↗
10. Nakano T, Ishimoto T, Matsugaki A et al (2020) Control of crystallographic orientation by metal additive manufacturing process of β-type Ti alloys based on the bone tissue anisotropy. MATEC Web of Conf 321:05002. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20203210500210.1051/matecconf/202032105002 ↗
11. Schatkoski VM, doAmaralMontanheirodeMenezes TLBRC et al (2021) Current advances concerning the most cited metal ions doped bioceramics and silicate-based bioactive glasses for bone tissue engineering. Ceramics Int 47(3):2999–301210.1016/j.ceramint.2020.09.213 ↗
12. Camara-Torres M, Duarte S, Sinha R et al (2021) 3D additive manufactured composite scaffolds with antibiotic-loaded lamellar fillers for bone infection prevention and tissue regeneration. Bioactive Mater 6(4):1073–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.09.03110.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.09.031 ↗
13. Yinze X, Gao R-N, Zhang H et al (2020) Rationally designed functionally graded porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds with high strength and toughness built via selective laser melting for load-bearing orthopedic applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 104:103673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.10367310.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103673 ↗
14. Zhang H, Huang H, Hao G et al (2021) 3D Printing hydrogel scaffolds with nanohydroxyapatite gradient to effectively repair osteochondral defects in rats. Adv Funct Mater 31(1):2006697. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20200669710.1002/adfm.202006697 ↗
15. Zhai X, Ma Y, Hou C et al (2017) 3D-printed high strength bioactive supramolecular polymer/clay nanocomposite hydrogel scaffold for bone regeneration. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.7b0022410.1021/acsbiomaterials.7b00224 ↗
16. Wang X, Xu S, Zhou S et al (2016) Topological design and additive manufacturing of porous metals for bone scaffolds and orthopaedic implants: a review. Biomaterials 83:127–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.01.01210.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.01.012 ↗
17. Bai L, Zhao Y, Chen P et al (2021) Targeting early healing phase with titania nanotube arrays on tunable diameters to accelerate bone regeneration and osseointegration. Small 17(4):2006287. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.20200628710.1002/smll.202006287 ↗
18. Bai L, Liu Y, Du Z et al (2018) Differential effect of hydroxyapatite nano-particle versus nano-rod decorated titanium micro-surface on osseointegration. Acta Biomater 76:344–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2018.06.02310.1016/j.actbio.2018.06.023 ↗
19. Koons G, Diba M, Mikos A (2020) Materials design for bone-tissue engineering. Nat Rev Mater. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-0204-210.1038/s41578-020-0204-2 ↗
20. Wang Y, Huang X, Zhang X (2021) Ultrarobust, tough and highly stretchable self-healing materials based on cartilage-inspired noncovalent assembly nanostructure. Nature Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21577-710.1038/s41467-021-21577-7 ↗
21. Hua M, Shuwang W, Ma Y et al (2021) Strong tough hydrogels via the synergy of freeze-casting and salting out. Nature 590(7847):594–599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03212-z10.1038/s41586-021-03212-z ↗
22. Hua J, Ng PF, Fei B (2018) High-strength hydrogels: microstructure design, characterization and applications: high-strength hydrogels: a review of microstructure design, characterization and applications. J Polym Sci, Part B: Polym Phys 56:1325–1335. https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.2472510.1002/polb.24725 ↗
23. Hirsch M, Charlet A, Amstad E (2020) 3D printing of strong and tough double network granular hydrogels. Adv Func Mater. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20200592910.1002/adfm.202005929 ↗
24. Manavitehrani I, Le TYL, Daly S et al (2018) Formation of porous biodegradable scaffolds based on poly(propylene carbonate) using gas foaming technology. Mater Sci Eng, C. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.11.08810.1016/j.msec.2018.11.088 ↗
25. Yao H, Kang J, Li W et al (2017) Novel β-TCP/PVA bilayered hydrogels with considerable physical and bio-functional properties for osteochondral repair. Biomed Mater. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/aa854110.1088/1748-605X/aa8541 ↗
26. Nahanmoghadam A, Asemani M, Gooadrzi V et al (2020) Design and fabrication of bone tissue scaffolds based on pcl/phbvcontaining hydroxyapatite nanoparticles: dual-leaching technique. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3708710.1002/jbm.a.37087 ↗
27. Lan W, Zhang X, Xu M et al (2019) Carbon nanotube reinforced polyvinyl alcohol/biphasic calcium phosphate scaffold for bone tissue engineering. RSC Adv 9:38998–39010. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RA08569F10.1039/C9RA08569F ↗
28. Kazimierczak P, Benko A, Pałka K et al (2020) Novel synthesis method combining a foaming agent with freeze-drying to obtain hybrid highly macroporous bone scaffolds. J Mater Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2020.01.00610.1016/j.jmst.2020.01.006 ↗
29. Bandyopadhyay A, Mitra I, Bose S (2020) 3D printing for bone regeneration. Curr Osteoporos Rep 18:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-020-00606-210.1007/s11914-020-00606-2 ↗
30. Han X, Sun M, Chen B et al (2021) Lotus seedpod-inspired internal vascularized 3D printed scaffold for bone tissue repair. Bioactive Mater 6(6):1639–1652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.01910.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.019 ↗
31. Bendtsen ST, Quinnell SP, Wei M (2017) Development of a novel alginate-polyvinyl alcohol-hydroxyapatite hydrogel for 3D bioprinting bone tissue engineered scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 105(5):1457–1468. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3603610.1002/jbm.a.36036 ↗
32. Wang C, Huang W, Zhou Y et al (2020) 3D printing of bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Bioactive Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.01.00410.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.01.004 ↗
33. Maroulakos M, Kamperos G, Tayebi L et al (2018) Applications of 3D printing on craniofacial bone repair: a systematic review. J Dent. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.11.00410.1016/j.jdent.2018.11.004 ↗
34. Lipian M, Kulak M, Stepien M (2019) Fast track integration of computational methods with experiments in small wind turbine development. Energies 12(9):1625. https://doi.org/10.3390/en1209162510.3390/en12091625 ↗
35. Zuo H, Liu Z, Zhang L et al (2021) Self-healing materials enable free-standing seamless large-scale 3D printing. Sci China-Mater. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40843-020-1603-y10.1007/s40843-020-1603-y ↗
36. Pasricha A, Greeninger R (2018) Exploration of 3D printing to create zero-waste sustainable fashion notions and jewelry. Fashion Text. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-018-0152-210.1186/s40691-018-0152-2 ↗
37. Kelly C, Miller A, Hollister S et al (2017) Design and structure-function characterization of 3d printed synthetic porous biomaterials for tissue engineering. Adv Healthcare Mater. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20170109510.1002/adhm.201701095 ↗
38. Tay YWD, Panda B, Paul SC et al (2017) 3D printing trends in building and construction industry: a review. Virtual Phys Prototyp 12(3):261–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2017.132672410.1080/17452759.2017.1326724 ↗
39. Yang Y, Zhang Q, Xu T et al (2020) Photocrosslinkable nanocomposite ink for printing strong, biodegradable and bioactive bone graft. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.12037810.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120378 ↗
40. Daly AC, Cunniffe GM, Sathy BN et al (2016) 3D Bioprinting of developmentally inspired templates for whole bone organ engineering. Adv Healthcare Mater 5(18):2353–2362. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20160018210.1002/adhm.201600182 ↗
41. Palmieri V, Lattanzi W, Perini G et al (2020) 3D-printed graphene for bone reconstruction. 2D Mater 7(2):022004. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/ab6a5d10.1088/2053-1583/ab6a5d ↗
42. Feng Z, Li Y, Hao L et al (2019) Graphene-reinforced biodegradable resin composites for stereolithographic 3d printing of bone structure scaffolds. J Nanomater 2019:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/971026410.1155/2019/9710264 ↗
43. Xi L, Zhang Y, Gupta H et al (2020) A multiscale study of structural and compositional changes in a natural nanocomposite: Osteoporotic bone with chronic endogenous steroid excess. Bone 143:115666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2020.11566610.1016/j.bone.2020.115666 ↗
44. Midha S, Dalela M, Sybil D et al (2019) Advances in three-dimensional bioprinting of bone: Progress and challenges. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 13(6):925–945. https://doi.org/10.1002/term.284710.1002/term.2847 ↗
45. Tang A, Ji J, Li J et al (2021) Nanocellulose/pegda aerogels with tunable poisson’s ratio fabricated by stereolithography for mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell culture. Nanomaterials 11(3):603. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1103060310.3390/nano11030603 ↗
46. van Bochove B, Grijpma DW (2019) Photo-crosslinked synthetic biodegradable polymer networks for biomedical applications. J Biomater Sci-Polym Ed 30(2):77–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/09205063.2018.155310510.1080/09205063.2018.1553105 ↗
47. Wei Y, Zhao D, Cao Q et al (2020) Stereolithography-based additive manufacturing of high performance osteoinductive calcium phosphate ceramics by a digital light-processing system. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 6(3):1787–1797. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b0166310.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b01663 ↗
48. Chen Y, Furukawa T, Ibi T et al (2021) Multi-scale micro-stereolithography using optical fibers with a photocurable ceramic slurry. Optical Mater Express 11(1):105–114. https://doi.org/10.1364/ome.40421710.1364/ome.404217 ↗
49. ZhouFuHe L‐YJY (2020) A review of 3D printing technologies for soft polymer materials. Adv Functional Mater 30(28):2000187. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20200018710.1002/adfm.202000187 ↗
50. Heinrich MA, Liu W, Jimenez A et al (2019) 3D Bioprinting: from benches to translational applications. Small. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.20180551010.1002/smll.201805510 ↗
51. Anandakrishnan N, Ye H, Guo Z et al (2021) Fast stereolithography printing of large-scale biocompatible hydrogel models. Adv Healthc Mater 10(10):e2002103. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20200210310.1002/adhm.202002103 ↗
52. Safonov A, Maltsev E, Chugunov S et al (2020) Design and fabrication of complex-shaped ceramic bone implants via 3d printing based on laser stereolithography. Appl Sci 10(20):713810.3390/app10207138 ↗
53. Le Guehennec L, Dorien VH, Plougonven E et al (2020) In vitro and in vivo biocompatibility of calcium-phosphate scaffolds three-dimensional printed by stereolithography for bone regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 108(3):412–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3682310.1002/jbm.a.36823 ↗
54. Amler AK, Dinkelborg PH, Schlauch D et al (2021) Comparison of the translational potential of human mesenchymal progenitor cells from different bone entities for autologous 3d bioprinted bone grafts. Int J Mol Sci 22(2):796. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms2202079610.3390/ijms22020796 ↗
55. Thavasiappan K, Venkatesan MS, Ariffuddeen M et al (2020) Design, analysis, fabrication and testing of PC porous scaffolds using rapid prototyping in clinical applications. Biomedicine 39(2):339–345. https://doi.org/10.51248/.v39i2.20410.51248/.v39i2.204 ↗
56. Chimene D, Kaunas R, Gaharwar AK (2020) Hydrogel bioink reinforcement for additive manufacturing: a focused review of emerging strategies. Adv Mater 32(1):1902026. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20190202610.1002/adma.201902026 ↗
57. Tromans G (2006) Rapid manufacturing: an industrial revolution for the digital age, pp 211–219.10.1002/0470033991.ch13 ↗
58. Truby RL, Lewis JA (2016) Printing soft matter in three dimensions. Nature 540(7633):371–378. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature2100310.1038/nature21003 ↗
59. Nadgorny M, Ameli A (2018) Functional polymers and nanocomposites for 3d printing of smart structures and devices. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 10(21):17489–17507. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.8b0178610.1021/acsami.8b01786 ↗
60. Yang K, Grant JC, Lamey P et al (2017) Diels–alder reversible thermoset 3d printing: isotropic thermoset polymers via fused filament fabrication. Adv Functional Mater 27(24):1700318. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20170031810.1002/adfm.201700318 ↗
61. Nowicki MA, Castro NJ, Plesniak MW et al (2016) 3D printing of novel osteochondral scaffolds with graded microstructure. Nanotechnology 27(41):414001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/27/41/41400110.1088/0957-4484/27/41/414001 ↗
62. Alizadeh-Osgouei M, Li Y, Vahid A et al (2020) High strength porous PLA gyroid scaffolds manufactured via fused deposition modeling for tissue-engineering applications. Smart Mater Med 2:15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smaim.2020.10.00310.1016/j.smaim.2020.10.003 ↗
63. Chen G, Chen N, Wang Q (2019) Fabrication and properties of poly(vinyl alcohol)/β-tricalcium phosphate composite scaffolds via fused deposition modeling for bone tissue engineering. Compos Sci Technol 172:17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.01.00410.1016/j.compscitech.2019.01.004 ↗
64. Distler T, Fournier N, Gruenewald A et al (2020) Polymer-bioactive glass composite filaments for 3d scaffold manufacturing by fused deposition modeling: fabrication and characterization. Front Bioengin Biotechnol 8:552. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.0055210.3389/fbioe.2020.00552 ↗
65. Yang C, Li J, Chongzun Z et al (2019) advanced antibacterial activity of biocompatible tantalum nanofilm via enhanced local innate immunity. Acta Biomater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.03.02710.1016/j.actbio.2019.03.027 ↗
66. Nulty J, Freeman FE, Browe DC et al (2021) 3D bioprinting of prevascularised implants for the repair of critically-sized bone defects. Acta Biomater 126:154–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2021.03.00310.1016/j.actbio.2021.03.003 ↗
67. Ojansivu M, Rashad A, Ahlinder A et al (2019) Wood-based nanocellulose and bioactive glass modified gelatin-alginate bioinks for 3D bioprinting of bone cells. Biofabrication 11(3):035010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab069210.1088/1758-5090/ab0692 ↗
68. Mandrycky C, Wang Z, Kim K et al (2016) 3D bioprinting for engineering complex tissues. Biotechnol Adv 34(4):422–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.12.01110.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.12.011 ↗
69. Okafor-Muo OL, Hassanin H, Kayyali R et al (2020) 3D Printing of solid oral dosage forms: numerous challenges with unique opportunities. J Pharm Sci 109(12):3535–3550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2020.08.02910.1016/j.xphs.2020.08.029 ↗
70. Lv C, Zhu L, Shi J et al (2018) The fabrication of tissue engineering scaffolds by inkjet printing technology. Mater Sci Forum 934:129–133. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.934.12910.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.934.129 ↗
71. Rajzer I, Rom M, Menaszek E et al (2015) Conductive PANI patterns on electrospun PCL/gelatin scaffolds modified with bioactive particles for bone tissue engineering. Mater Lett 138:60–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2014.09.07710.1016/j.matlet.2014.09.077 ↗
72. Gao G, Schilling AF, Yonezawa T et al (2014) Bioactive nanoparticles stimulate bone tissue formation in bioprinted three-dimensional scaffold and human mesenchymal stem cells. Biotechnol J 9(10):1304–1311. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.20140030510.1002/biot.201400305 ↗
73. Cui X, Dean D, Ruggeri ZM et al (2010) Cell damage evaluation of thermal inkjet printed chinese hamster ovary cells. Biotechnol Bioeng 106(6):963–969. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.2276210.1002/bit.22762 ↗
74. Vanderburgh JP, Fernando SJ, Merkel AR et al (2017) Fabrication of trabecular bone-templated tissue-engineered constructs by 3d inkjet printing. Adv Healthcare Mater 6(22):1700369. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20170036910.1002/adhm.201700369 ↗
75. Barui S, Panda AK, Naskar S et al (2019) 3D inkjet printing of biomaterials with strength reliability and cytocompatibility: quantitative process strategy for Ti-6Al-4V. Biomaterials 213:119212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.05.02310.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.05.023 ↗
76. Liao B, Xia RF, Li W et al (2021) 3D-Printed Ti6Al4V scaffolds with graded triply periodic minimal surface structure for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Eng Perform 30:4993–5004. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-021-05580-z10.1007/s11665-021-05580-z ↗
77. Kamboj N, Aghayan M, Sara Rodrigo-Vázquez C et al (2019) Novel silicon-wollastonite based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering produced by selective laser melting. Ceram Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.20810.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.208 ↗
78. Hull SM, Lindsay CD, Brunel LG et al (2021) 3D Bioprinting using universal orthogonal network (UNION) bioinks. Adv Func Mater 31(7):2007983. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20200798310.1002/adfm.202007983 ↗
79. Kim SH, Yeon YK, Lee JM et al (2018) Precisely printable and biocompatible silk fibroin bioink for digital light processing 3D printing. Nat Commun 9:1620. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04517-w10.1038/s41467-018-04517-w ↗
80. He Y, Wang F, Wang X et al (2021) A photocurable hybrid chitosan/acrylamide bioink for DLP based 3D bioprinting. Mater Des 202:109588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.10958810.1016/j.matdes.2021.109588 ↗
81. Hong H, Seo YB, Kim DY et al (2020) Digital light processing 3D printed silk fibroin hydrogel for cartilage tissue engineering. Biomaterials 232:119679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.11967910.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119679 ↗
82. Ouyang L, Armstrong JPK, Lin Y et al (2020) Expanding and optimizing 3D bioprinting capabilities using complementary network bioinks. Sci Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc552910.1126/sciadv.abc5529 ↗
83. Duymaz BT, Erdiler FB, Alan T et al (2019) 3D bio-printing of levan/polycaprolactone/gelatin blends for bone tissue engineering: characterization of the cellular behavior. Eur Polymer J 119:426–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2019.08.01510.1016/j.eurpolymj.2019.08.015 ↗
84. Micic M, Antonijevic D, Milutinovic-Smiljanic S et al (2020) Developing a novel resorptive hydroxyapatite-based bone substitute for over-critical size defect reconstruction: physicochemical and biological characterization and proof of concept in segmental rabbit’s ulna reconstruction. Biomed Eng Biomedizinische Technik 65(4):491–505. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2019-021810.1515/bmt-2019-0218 ↗
85. Demirtas TT, Irmak G, Gumusderelioglu M (2017) A bioprintable form of chitosan hydrogel for bone tissue engineering. Biofabrication 9(3):035003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa7b1d10.1088/1758-5090/aa7b1d ↗
86. Liu X, Gaihre B, George MN et al (2021) 3Dbioprinting of oligo (poly ethylene glycol fumarate) for bone and nerve tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 109(1):6–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3700210.1002/jbm.a.37002 ↗
87. Anada T, Pan C-C, Stahl AM et al (2019) Vascularized bone-mimetic hydrogel constructs by 3d bioprinting to promote osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Int J Mol Sci 20(5):1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms2005109610.3390/ijms20051096 ↗
88. Bose S, Vahabzadeh S, Bandyopadhyay A (2013) Bone tssue engineering using 3D printing. Mater Today 16:496–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2013.11.01710.1016/j.mattod.2013.11.017 ↗
89. Ardelean IL, Gudovan D, Ficai D et al (2018) Collagen/hydroxyapatite bone grafts manufactured by homogeneous/heterogeneous 3D printing. Mater Lett 231:179–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2018.08.04210.1016/j.matlet.2018.08.042 ↗
90. Aldana A, Valente F, Dilley R et al (2020) Development of 3D bioprinted GelMA-alginate hydrogels with tunable mechanical properties. Bioprinting 21:e00105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e0010510.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00105 ↗
91. Chimene D, Lennox KK, Kaunas RR et al (2016) Advanced bioinks for 3d printing: a materials science perspective. Ann Biomed Eng 44(6):2090–2102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-016-1638-y10.1007/s10439-016-1638-y ↗
92. Yang Yang, Song Xuan, Li Xiangjia et al (2018) Recent progress in biomimetic additive manufacturing technology: from materials to functional structures. Adv Mater 30(36):1706539. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20170653910.1002/adma.201706539 ↗
93. Ouyang L, Rui Yao Y, Zhao WS (2016) Effect of bioink properties on printability and cell viability for 3D bioplotting of embryonic stem cells. Biofabrication 8(3):035020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/3/03502010.1088/1758-5090/8/3/035020 ↗
94. Siu TL, Rogers JM, Lin K et al (2018) Custom-made titanium 3-dimensional printed interbody cages for treatment of osteoporotic fracture-related spinal deformity. World Neurosurg 111:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.16010.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.160 ↗
95. Nune KC, Misra RDK, Gaytan SM et al (2015) Interplay between cellular activity and three-dimensional scaffold-cell constructs with different foam structure processed by electron beam melting. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 103(5):1677–1692. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3530710.1002/jbm.a.35307 ↗
96. Yu W, Zhao H, Ding Z et al (2016) In vitro and in vivo evaluation of MgF2 coated AZ31 magnesium alloy porous scaffolds for bone regeneration. Colloids Surf B. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2016.10.03710.1016/j.colsurfb.2016.10.037 ↗
97. Dumas M, Terriault P, Brailovski V (2017) Modelling and characterization of a porosity graded lattice structure for additively manufactured biomaterials. Mater Des 121:383–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.02110.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.021 ↗
98. Zheng Y, Han Q, Wang J et al (2020) Promotion of osseointegration between Implant and bone interface by titanium alloy porous scaffolds prepared by 3D printing. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 6(9):5181–5190. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c0066210.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00662 ↗
99. Soro N, Attar H, Brodie E et al (2019) Evaluation of the mechanical compatibility of additively manufactured porous Ti–25Ta alloy for load-bearing implant applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 97:149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.05.01910.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.05.019 ↗
100. Kuo T-Y, Chin W-H, Chien C-S et al (2019) Mechanical and biological properties of graded porous tantalum coatings deposited on titanium alloy implants by vacuum plasma spraying. Surf Coat Technol 372:399–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.05.00310.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.05.003 ↗