Fabrication of hybrid tubular scaffolds using direct ink writing for tracheal regenerative application
Source abstract
Abstract
Tracheal tissue engineering has been an alternative treatment for long-term tracheal stenosis due to the lack of donors and suitable tracheal implants. This work is meant to construct a novel hybrid tracheal support of synthetic and natural polymers using direct ink writing. A blend of polycaprolactone ( $$mathrm{PCL}$$ ) and medical-grade polyurethane ( $$mathrm{PU}$$ ) as synthetic material was used to fabricate tubular grafts. The synthetic graft was coated with various combinations of alginate ( $$A$$ ) and gelatin ( $$G$$ ) solutions using 3D printing to prepare hybrid tracheal scaffolds. The novelty in this method was the coating of the natural polymeric solution by extruding the solution over a rotating tubular graft by exploiting the advantages of 3D printing. The synthetic part has mechanical support, and the coated natural material has enhanced biological activities. Key assessments such as rheological investigations and printability studies were performed to characterize the flow behavior and fidelity of the printed constructs. Based on the above investigations, suitable combinations of alginate and gelatin ( $$A/G$$ ) were chosen and used for further investigations. The effect of natural polymer coating using 3D printing over $$mathrm{PCL}/mathrm{PU}$$ scaffold was carefully investigated using various physicochemical, morphological and mechanical investigations. Further, the hybrid tracheal scaffolds were evaluated for biological assessments such as proliferation, cytotoxicity and cell adhesion assay using human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs). The biological investigations showed that the coated scaffolds yielded improved biocompatibility compared to synthetic scaffolds and could be a potential tissue-engineered solution to tracheal regeneration.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Tracheal and airway disorders · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Abdallah FCB, Taktak S, Chtourou A et al (2011) Burden of chronic respiratory diseases (CRD) in Middle East and North Africa (MENA). World Allergy Organ J 4:S6–S8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1939-4551-4-S1-S610.1186/1939-4551-4-S1-S6 ↗
2. Mroz RM, Kordecki K, Kozlowski MD et al (2008) Severe respiratory distress caused by central airway obstruction treated with self-expandable metallic stents. J Physiol Pharmacol 59:491–497
3. Walser EM (2005) Stent placement for tracheobronchial disease. Eur J Radiol 55:321–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.03.00510.1016/j.ejrad.2005.03.005 ↗
4. Wain Jr JC (2009) Postintubation tracheal stenosis. In: Seminars in thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. pp 284–28910.1053/j.semtcvs.2009.08.001 ↗
5. Wright CD, Grillo HC, Wain JC et al (2004) Anastomotic complications after tracheal resection: prognostic factors and management. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 128:731–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.07.00510.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.07.005 ↗
6. Delaere P, Vrancks J, Verleden G et al (2010) Tracheal allotransplantation after withdrawal of immunosuppressive therapy. Bull Acad Natl Med 194:1335–1337. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4079(19)32213-710.1016/S0001-4079(19)32213-7 ↗
7. Levashov YN, Yablonsky PK, Cherny SM et al (1993) One-stage allotransplantation of thoracic segment of the trachea in a patient with idiopathic fibrosing mediastinitis and marked tracheal stenosis. Eur J Cardio-thorac Surg 7:383–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/1010-7940(93)90071-I10.1016/1010-7940(93)90071-I ↗
8. Grillo HC (2002) Tracheal replacement: a critical review. Ann Thorac Surg 73:1995–2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03564-610.1016/S0003-4975(02)03564-6 ↗
9. Propst EJ, Prager JD, Meinzen-Derr J et al (2011) Pediatric tracheal reconstruction using cadaveric homograft. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137:583–590. https://doi.org/10.1001/archoto.2011.8510.1001/archoto.2011.85 ↗
10. Steinke M, Dally I, Friedel G et al (2015) Host-integration of a tissue-engineered airway patch: two-year follow-up in a single patient. Tissue Eng Part A 21:573–579. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tea.2014.020010.1089/ten.tea.2014.0200 ↗
11. Elliott MJ, De Coppi P, Speggiorin S et al (2012) Stem-cell-based, tissue engineered tracheal replacement in a child: a 2-year follow-up study. Lancet 380:994–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60737-510.1016/S0140-6736(12)60737-5 ↗
12. Hamilton NJ, Kanani M, Roebuck DJ et al (2015) Tissue-engineered tracheal replacement in a child: a 4-year follow-up study. Am J Transplant 15:2750–2757. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.1331810.1111/ajt.13318 ↗
13. Law JX, Liau LL, Aminuddin BS, Ruszymah BHI (2016) Tissue-engineered trachea: a review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 91:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.10.01210.1016/j.ijporl.2016.10.012 ↗
14. Pandey H, Mohol SS, Kandi R (2022) 4D printing of tracheal scaffold using shape-memory polymer composite. Mater Lett 329:133238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2022.13323810.1016/j.matlet.2022.133238 ↗
15. Lin C-H, Su J-M, Hsu S-H (2008) Evaluation of type II collagen scaffolds reinforced by poly(ε-caprolactone) as tissue-engineered trachea. Tissue Eng Part C Methods 14:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1089/tec.2007.033610.1089/tec.2007.0336 ↗
16. Ghorbani F, Moradi L, Shadmehr MB et al (2017) In-vivo characterization of a 3D hybrid scaffold based on PCL/decellularized aorta for tracheal tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C 81:74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.04.15010.1016/j.msec.2017.04.150 ↗
17. Pan S, Zhong Y, Shan Y et al (2019) Selection of the optimum 3D-printed pore and the surface modification techniques for tissue engineering tracheal scaffold in vivo reconstruction. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 107:360–37010.1002/jbm.a.36536 ↗
18. Shan Y, Wang Y, Li J et al (2017) Biomechanical properties and cellular biocompatibility of 3D printed tracheal graft. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 40:1813–1823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-017-1835-610.1007/s00449-017-1835-6 ↗
19. Chang JW, Park SA, Park JK et al (2014) Tissue-engineered tracheal reconstruction using three-dimensionally printed artificial tracheal graft: preliminary report. Artif Organs 38:E95–E105. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.1231010.1111/aor.12310 ↗
20. Gao M, Zhang H, Dong W et al (2017) Tissue-engineered trachea from a 3D-printed scaffold enhances whole-segment tracheal repair. Sci Rep 7:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05518-310.1038/s41598-017-05518-3 ↗
21. Park JH, Jung JW, Kang HW et al (2012) Development of a 3D bellows tracheal graft: mechanical behavior analysis, fabrication and an in vivo feasibility study. Biofabrication 4:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5082/4/3/03500410.1088/1758-5082/4/3/035004 ↗
22. Park JH, Park JY, Nam IC et al (2018) A rational tissue engineering strategy based on three-dimensional (3D) printing for extensive circumferential tracheal reconstruction. Biomaterials 185:276–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.09.03110.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.09.031 ↗
23. She Y, Fan Z, Wang L et al (2021) 3D printed biomimetic PCL scaffold as framework interspersed with collagen for long segment tracheal replacement. Front Cell Dev Biol 9:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.62979610.3389/fcell.2021.629796 ↗
24. Bae SW, Lee KW, Park JH et al (2018) 3D bioprinted artificial trachea with epithelial cells and chondrogenic-differentiated bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Int J Mol Sci 19:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms1906162410.3390/ijms19061624 ↗
25. Kim H, Lee JY, Han H et al (2021) Improved chondrogenic performance with protective tracheal design of Chitosan membrane surrounding 3D-printed trachea. Sci Rep 11:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88830-310.1038/s41598-021-88830-3 ↗
26. Kandi R, Sachdeva K, Choudhury SD et al (2023) A facile 3D bio-fabrication of customized tubular scaffolds using solvent-based extrusion printing for tissue-engineered tracheal grafts. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 111:278–293. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3745810.1002/jbm.a.37458 ↗
27. Lee KY, Mooney DJ (2012) Alginate: properties and biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci 37:106–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2011.06.00310.1016/j.progpolymsci.2011.06.003 ↗
28. Chawla D, Kaur T, Joshi A, Singh N (2020) 3D bioprinted alginate-gelatin based scaffolds for soft tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 144:560–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.12710.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.127 ↗
29. Kandi R, Pandey PM, Majood M, Mohanty S (2021) Fabrication and characterization of customized tubular scaffolds for tracheal tissue engineering by using solvent based 3D printing on predefined template. Rapid Prototyp J 27:421–428. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-08-2020-018610.1108/RPJ-08-2020-0186 ↗
30. Kandi R, Pandey PM (2021) Statistical modelling and optimization of print quality and mechanical properties of customized tubular scaffolds fabricated using solvent-based extrusion 3D printing process. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 235:1421–1438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411921103201210.1177/09544119211032012 ↗
31. Mondal A, Gebeyehu A, Miranda M et al (2019) Characterization and printability of sodium alginate-gelatin hydrogel for bioprinting NSCLC co-culture. Sci Rep 9:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55034-910.1038/s41598-019-55034-9 ↗
32. Dávila JL, d’Ávila MA (2019) Rheological evaluation of laponite/alginate inks for 3D extrusion-based printing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 101:675–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2876-y10.1007/s00170-018-2876-y ↗
33. Adhikari J, Perwez MS, Das A, Saha P (2021) Development of hydroxyapatite reinforced alginate–chitosan based printable biomaterial-ink. Nano-Struct Nano-Objects 25:100630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoso.2020.10063010.1016/j.nanoso.2020.100630 ↗
34. Bertuola M, Aráoz B, Gilabert U et al (2021) Gelatin–alginate–hyaluronic acid inks for 3D printing: effects of bioglass addition on printability, rheology and scaffold tensile modulus. J Mater Sci 56:15327–15343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06250-010.1007/s10853-021-06250-0 ↗
35. Vyas C, Zhang J, Øvrebø Ø et al (2021) 3D printing of silk microparticle reinforced polycaprolactone scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C 118:111433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.11143310.1016/j.msec.2020.111433 ↗
36. Hazur J, Detsch R, Karakaya E et al (2020) Improving alginate printability for biofabrication: establishment of a universal and homogeneous pre-crosslinking technique. Biofabrication 12:045004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab98e510.1088/1758-5090/ab98e5 ↗
37. Negrini NC, Celikkin N, Tarsini P et al (2020) Three-dimensional printing of chemically crosslinked gelatin hydrogels for adipose tissue engineering. Biofabrication 12:025001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab56f910.1088/1758-5090/ab56f9 ↗
38. Li H, Tan YJ, Leong KF, Li L (2017) 3D bioprinting of highly thixotropic alginate/methylcellulose hydrogel with strong interface bonding. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9:20086–20097. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.7b0421610.1021/acsami.7b04216 ↗
39. Fajardo AR, Silva MB, Lopes LC et al (2012) Hydrogel based on an alginate-Ca2+/chondroitin sulfate matrix as a potential colon-specific drug delivery system. RSC Adv 2:11095–11103. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ra20785k10.1039/c2ra20785k ↗
40. Samimi Gharaie S, Habibi S, Nazockdast H (2018) Fabrication and characterization of chitosan/gelatin/thermoplastic polyurethane blend nanofibers. J Text Fibrous Mater 1:251522111876932. https://doi.org/10.1177/251522111876932410.1177/2515221118769324 ↗
41. You F, Wu X, Chen X (2017) 3D printing of porous alginate/gelatin hydrogel scaffolds and their mechanical property characterization. Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater 66:299–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/00914037.2016.120183010.1080/00914037.2016.1201830 ↗
42. Othman SA, Soon CF, Ma NL et al (2020) Alginate-gelatin bioink for bioprinting of hela spheroids in alginate-gelatin hexagon shaped scaffolds. Polym Bull 78:6115–6135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00289-020-03421-y10.1007/s00289-020-03421-y ↗
43. Pan T, Song W, Cao X, Wang Y (2016) 3D bioplotting of Gelatin/alginate scaffolds for tissue engineering: influence of crosslinking degree and pore architecture on physicochemical properties. J Mater Sci Technol 32:889–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2016.01.00710.1016/j.jmst.2016.01.007 ↗
44. Urruela-Barrios R, Ramírez-Cedillo E, de Diaz León A et al (2019) Alginate/gelatin hydrogels reinforced with TiO2 and β-TCP fabricated by microextrusion-based printing for tissue regeneration. Polymers (Basel) 11:457. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1103045710.3390/polym11030457 ↗
45. Sithole MN, Kumar P, du Toit LC et al (2018) A 3D bioprinted in situ conjugated-co-fabricated scaffold for potential bone tissue engineering applications. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 106:1311–1321. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3633310.1002/jbm.a.36333 ↗
46. Hossan J, Gafur MA, Kadir MR, Mainul M (2014) Preparation and characterization of gelatin- hydroxyapatite composite for bone tissue engineering. Int J Eng Technol 57:113–122
47. Gautam S, Chou CF, Dinda AK et al (2014) Fabrication and characterization of PCL/gelatin/chitosan ternary nanofibrous composite scaffold for tissue engineering applications. J Mater Sci 49:1076–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7785-810.1007/s10853-013-7785-8 ↗
48. Zhou Z, Chen J, Peng C et al (2014) Fabrication and physical properties of gelatin/sodium alginate/hyaluronic acid composite wound dressing hydrogel. J Macromol Sci Part A Pure Appl Chem 51:318–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/10601325.2014.88269310.1080/10601325.2014.882693 ↗