journal article·2024-02-12

Three-Dimensional Extrusion Printed Urinary Specific Grafts: Mechanistic Insights into Buildability and Biophysical Properties

Sulob Roy Chowdhury, Garga Mondal, Praneeth Ratnayake, Bikramjit Basu

Publisher page

Abstract

The compositional formulations and the optimization of process parameters to fabricate hydrogel scaffolds with urological tissue-mimicking biophysical properties are not yet extensively explored, including a comprehensive assessment of a spectrum of properties, such as mechanical strength, viscoelasticity, antimicrobial property, and cytocompatibility. While addressing this aspect, the present work provides mechanistic insights into process science, to produce shape-fidelity compliant alginate-based biomaterial ink blended with gelatin and synthetic nanocellulose. The composition-dependent pseudoplasticity, viscoelasticity, thixotropy, and gel stability over a longer duration in physiological context have been rationalized in terms of intermolecular hydrogen bonding interactions among the biomaterial ink constituents. By varying the hybrid hydrogel ink composition within a narrow compositional window, the resulting hydrogel closely mimics the natural urological tissue-like properties, including tensile stretchability, compressive strength, and biophysical properties. Based on the printability assessment using a critical analysis of gel strength, we have established the buildability of the acellular hydrogel ink and have been successful in fabricating shape-fidelity compliant urological patches or hollow cylindrical grafts using 3D extrusion printing. Importantly, the new hydrogel formulations with good hydrophilicity, support fibroblast cell proliferation and inhibit the growth of Gram-negative E. coli bacteria. These attributes were rationalized in terms of nanocellulose-induced physicochemical changes on the scaffold surface. Taken together, the present study uncovers the process-science-based understanding of the 3D extrudability of the newly formulated alginate-gelatin-nanocellulose-based hydrogels with urological tissue-specific biophysical, cytocompatibility, and antibacterial properties.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine · Anatomy and Medical Technology

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

Affiliations

Materials Research Centre, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India

Funding

Science and Engineering Research Board · Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India · Ministry of Education, India · Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha

References (76)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/nbt.295810.1038/nbt.2958 ↗
2. 10.1557/s43578-021-00255-w10.1557/s43578-021-00255-w ↗
3. 10.1007/s41745-019-00129-510.1007/s41745-019-00129-5 ↗
4. 10.1038/nbt.341310.1038/nbt.3413 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.bprint.2022.e0024110.1016/j.bprint.2022.e00241 ↗
6. 10.1039/C7BM00765E10.1039/C7BM00765E ↗
7. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c0008410.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00084 ↗
8. 10.1088/1758-5090/7/4/04410210.1088/1758-5090/7/4/044102 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.07610.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.076 ↗
10. 10.1111/ijac.1388510.1111/ijac.13885 ↗
11. 10.1002/adhm.20170026410.1002/adhm.201700264 ↗
12. 10.1002/adma.20160498310.1002/adma.201604983 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.05010.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.050 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.07.03810.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.07.038 ↗
15. 10.1088/1758-5082/5/1/01500310.1088/1758-5082/5/1/015003 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.09.00310.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.09.003 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.09.03310.1016/j.actbio.2014.09.033 ↗
18. 10.1021/acsapm.1c0056710.1021/acsapm.1c00567 ↗
19. 10.1039/C7PY00826K10.1039/C7PY00826K ↗
20. 10.1039/C9NR07643C10.1039/C9NR07643C ↗
21. 10.1021/acsami.8b2017810.1021/acsami.8b20178 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.12230510.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122305 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.17210.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.172 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.nano.2005.10.00310.1016/j.nano.2005.10.003 ↗
25. 10.1093/toxsci/kfg24310.1093/toxsci/kfg243 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2022.11996410.1016/j.carbpol.2022.119964 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.12345010.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.123450 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.12079010.1016/j.carbpol.2023.120790 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.bioadv.2023.21350110.1016/j.bioadv.2023.213501 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.12089510.1016/j.carbpol.2023.120895 ↗
31. 10.1002/mabi.20210041310.1002/mabi.202100413 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.mtla.2022.10154210.1016/j.mtla.2022.101542 ↗
33. 10.1002/adhm.20210020610.1002/adhm.202100206 ↗
34. Ng · Int. J. Bioprinting · 2016 · 2 · 5310.18063/IJB.2016.01.009 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.17410.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.174 ↗
36. Shehzad Ahmer · Bioengineering · 2023 · 10 · 70410.3390/bioengineering10060704 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.msec.2021.11186610.1016/j.msec.2021.111866 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.01810.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.018 ↗
39. Li Zhao · Sci. Rep. · 2018 · 8 · 802010.1038/s41598-018-26407-3 ↗
40. Ajalloueian Fatemeh · Nat. Rev. Urology · 2018 · 15 · 15510.1038/nrurol.2018.5 ↗
41. Sun Mengwen · Polymers · 2022 · 14 · 140010.3390/polym14071400 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.surge.2017.07.00210.1016/j.surge.2017.07.002 ↗
43. Sharma Swati · Biomaterials · 2022 · 281 · 12133110.1016/j.biomaterials.2021.121331 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.inoche.2022.11005410.1016/j.inoche.2022.110054 ↗
45. Lizundia Erlantz · Carbohydr. Polym. · 2020 · 236 · 11600110.1016/j.carbpol.2020.116001 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.17910.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.179 ↗
47. Yao Bin · Biofabrication · 2019 · 11 · 04502010.1088/1758-5090/ab38ef ↗
48. 10.1515/arh-2007-000110.1515/arh-2007-0001 ↗
49. Ribeiro Alexandre · Biofabrication · 2017 · 10 · 01410210.1088/1758-5090/aa90e2 ↗
50. 10.3390/ma1103045410.3390/ma11030454 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.11036210.1016/j.matdes.2021.110362 ↗
52. 10.1039/C8BM01246F10.1039/C8BM01246F ↗
53. Dutta Sayan Deb · Int. J. Biol. Macromol. · 2021 · 167 · 64410.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.12.011 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.bprint.2017.12.00110.1016/j.bprint.2017.12.001 ↗
55. 10.1039/D0RA09620B10.1039/D0RA09620B ↗
56. Annamalai Meenakshi · Nanoscale · 2016 · 8 · 576410.1039/C5NR06705G ↗
57. 10.1016/j.actbio.2021.04.05510.1016/j.actbio.2021.04.055 ↗
58. Piras · Biomater. Sci. · 2017 · 5 · 198810.1039/C7BM00510E ↗
59. 10.1021/acs.biomac.2c0151410.1021/acs.biomac.2c01514 ↗
60. Ai Yusen · J. Mater. Chem. B · 2023
61. 10.1021/acs.biomac.5b0159310.1021/acs.biomac.5b01593 ↗
62. Siqueira G. · Adv. Funct. Mater. · 2017 · 27 · 160461910.1002/adfm.201604619 ↗
63. Sawkins Michael John · Biofabrication · 2015 · 7 · 03500410.1088/1758-5090/7/3/035004 ↗
64. Pääkkö Marjo · Biomacromolecules · 2007 · 8 · 193410.1021/bm061215p ↗
65. 10.1007/s00192-011-1409-010.1007/s00192-011-1409-0 ↗
66. 10.1002/adhm.20180033410.1002/adhm.201800334 ↗
67. Rzhepishevska Olena · Biomater. Sci. · 2013 · 1 · 58910.1039/c3bm00197k ↗
68. 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.07.04010.1016/j.actbio.2020.07.040 ↗
69. 10.1016/j.msec.2020.11097210.1016/j.msec.2020.110972 ↗
70. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.05.15710.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.05.157 ↗
71. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.11.04110.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.11.041 ↗
72. Rzhepishevska Olena · Biomater. Sci. · 2013 · 1 · 58910.1039/c3bm00197k ↗
73. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.08410.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.084 ↗
74. Zhang Qianqian · J. Mater. Chem. B · 2022 · 10 · 543910.1039/D2TB00735E ↗
75. Ren Lili · Biomater. Sci. · 2022 · 10 · 317410.1039/D2BM00157H ↗
76. Dadsetan Mahrokh · Acta biomaterialia · 2011 · 7 · 208010.1016/j.actbio.2011.01.012 ↗