journal article·2022-12-01Open access

A Micro-Scale Non-Linear Finite Element Model to Optimize the Mechanical Behavior of Bioprinted Constructs

Abhinaba Banerjee, Sudipto Datta, Ankita Das, Amit Roy Chowdhury, Pallab Datta

Abstract

Extrusion-based bioprinting is an enabling biofabrication technique that is used to create heterogeneous tissue constructs according to patient-specific geometries and compositions. The optimization of bioinks as per requirements for specific tissue applications is an essential exercise in ensuring clinical translation of the bioprinting technologies. Most notably, optimum hydrogel polymer concentrations are required to ensure adequate mechanical properties of bioprinted constructs without causing significant shear stresses on cells. However, experimental iterations are often tedious for optimizing the bioink properties. In this work, a nonlinear finite element modeling approach has been undertaken to determine the effect of different bioink parameters such as composition, concentration on the range of stresses being experienced by the cells in the bioprinted construct. The stress distribution of the cells at different parts of the constructs has also been modeled. It is found that both bioink chemical compositions and concentrations can substantially alter the stress effects experienced by the cells. Concentrated regions of softer cells near pore regions were found to increase stress concentrations by almost three times compared with stress generated in cells away from the pores. The study provides a method for rapid optimization of bioinks, design of bioprinted constructs, as well as toolpath plans for fabricating constructs with homogenous properties.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Cellular Mechanics and Interactions

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

Affiliations

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Howrah, India.

Centre for Healthcare Science and Technology, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Howrah, India.

Department of Aerospace Engineering and Applied Mechanics, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Howrah, India.

Department of Pharmaceutics, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Kolkata, India.

References (68)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3389/fsurg.2020.60983610.3389/fsurg.2020.609836 ↗
2. 10.1097/SLA.000000000000214110.1097/SLA.0000000000002141 ↗
3. 10.1063/5.003490110.1063/5.0034901 ↗
4. 10.1116/1.511139210.1116/1.5111392 ↗
5. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c0008410.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00084 ↗
6. 10.1126/sciadv.abc552910.1126/sciadv.abc5529 ↗
7. 10.1007/s10856-020-06440-310.1007/s10856-020-06440-3 ↗
8. 10.1038/s41598-018-31880-x10.1038/s41598-018-31880-x ↗
9. Mironov V, , Visconti RP, , Kasyanov V, et al. Organ printing: Tissue spheroids as building blocks. Biomaterials 2009. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.084.
10. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.01.03410.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.01.034 ↗
11. Göhl J, , Markstedt K, , Mark A, et al. Simulations of 3D bioprinting: Predicting bioprintability of nanofibrillar inks. Biofabrication 2018. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/aac872.
12. Calneryte D, , Barauskas R, , Milasiene D, et al. Multi-scale finite element modeling of 3D printed structures subjected to mechanical loads. Rapid Prototyp J 2018. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1108/RPJ-05-2016-0074.
13. Cloonan AJ, , Shahmirzadi D, , Li RX, et al. 3D-printed tissue-mimicking phantoms for medical imaging and computational validation applications. 3D Print Addit Manuf 2014. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1089/3dp.2013.0010.
14. Pataky K, , Braschler T, , Negro A, et al. Microdrop printing of hydrogel bioinks into 3D tissue-like geometries. Adv Mater 2012. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1002/adma.201102800.
15. Ng WL, , Lee JM, , Yeong WY, et al. Microvalve-based bioprinting-process, bio-inks and applications. Biomater Sci 2017. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1039/c6bm00861e.
16. Tirella A, , Vozzi F, , De Maria C, et al. Substrate stiffness influences high resolution printing of living cells with an ink-jet system. J Biosci Bioeng 2011. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2011.03.019.
17. 10.1017/S095679251800065710.1017/S0956792518000657 ↗
18. Gao X Sozumert E Silberschmidt V. Discontinuous finite element model of hydrogels: Predicting stiffness of nanofibers. Numer Methods Adv Simul Biomech Biol Process 2018:3–16. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-811718-7.00001-0.10.1016/B978-0-12-811718-7.00001-0 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.12.06310.1016/j.compstruct.2016.12.063 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.01.00610.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.01.006 ↗
21. 10.1021/acs.macromol.7b0246510.1021/acs.macromol.7b02465 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.jmgm.2021.10791510.1016/j.jmgm.2021.107915 ↗
23. 10.1002/andp.1905322080610.1002/andp.19053220806 ↗
24. Banerjee A, , Khan MP, , Barui A, et al. Finite element analysis of the influence of cyclic strain on cells anchored to substrates with varying properties. Med Biol Eng Comput 2021, 2021; 1:1–17.
25. 10.1177/204173141878714110.1177/2041731418787141 ↗
26. d'Angelo M, , Benedetti E, , Tupone MG, et al. The role of stiffness in cell reprogramming: A potential role for biomaterials in inducing tissue regeneration. Cells, 2019; 8. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/cells8091036.
27. Rahmati M, , Blaker JJ, , Lyngstadaas SP, et al. Designing multigradient biomaterials for skin regeneration. Mater Today Adv, 2020; 5. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.mtadv.2019.100051.
28. Wu J, , Mao Z, , Tan H, , Han L, et al. Gradient biomaterials and their influences on cell migration. Interface Focus 2012. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2011.0124.
29. 10.1115/1.402629010.1115/1.4026290 ↗
30. 10.1038/s41598-017-15956-810.1038/s41598-017-15956-8 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.10800110.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108001 ↗
32. 10.1115/1.404864610.1115/1.4048646 ↗
33. 10.1007/s11517-008-0381-410.1007/s11517-008-0381-4 ↗
34. Stromberg DD Wiederhielm CA. Viscoelastic description of a collagenous tissue in simple elongation. J Appl Physiol 1969. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1969.26.6.857.10.1152/jappl.1969.26.6.857 ↗
35. Cleveland WS Devlin SJ. Locally weighted regression: An approach to regression analysis by local fitting. J Am Stat Assoc 1988. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1988.10478639.10.1080/01621459.1988.10478639 ↗
36. Boyce MC Arruda EM. Constitutive models of rubber elasticity: A review. Rubber Chem Technol 2000. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.5254/1.3547602.10.5254/1.3547602 ↗
37. Wang L-R Lu Z-H. Modeling method of constitutive law of rubber hyperelasticity based on finite element simulations. Rubber Chem Technol 2003. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.5254/1.3547739.10.5254/1.3547739 ↗
38. 10.1088/0957-4484/20/5/05510310.1088/0957-4484/20/5/055103 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.11.00610.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.11.006 ↗
40. 10.1021/acsami.9b0428310.1021/acsami.9b04283 ↗
41. 10.1039/C3BM60195A10.1039/C3BM60195A ↗
42. 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2001.025003213.x10.1046/j.1525-1594.2001.025003213.x ↗
43. 10.1002/jbm.a.3227710.1002/jbm.a.32277 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.08.04710.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.08.047 ↗
45. 10.3390/polym1209193010.3390/polym12091930 ↗
46. 10.1002/mabi.20060006310.1002/mabi.200600063 ↗
47. 10.1002/jez.140271010210.1002/jez.1402710102 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.10.02110.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.10.021 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.06.00910.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.06.009 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.bbe.2020.01.00510.1016/j.bbe.2020.01.005 ↗
51. 10.1242/jeb.0134410.1242/jeb.01344 ↗
52. 10.1080/15476278.2015.101968710.1080/15476278.2015.1019687 ↗
53. Du J, , Zu Y, , Li J, et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness dictates Wnt expression through integrin pathway. Sci Rep, 2016; 6. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1038/srep20395.
54. 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.08.01810.1016/j.actbio.2018.08.018 ↗
55. 10.1088/1748-605X/abce4e10.1088/1748-605X/abce4e ↗
56. 10.1126/sciadv.aaw511110.1126/sciadv.aaw5111 ↗
57. 10.1177/204173141880209010.1177/2041731418802090 ↗
58. 10.1016/j.joca.2019.07.01810.1016/j.joca.2019.07.018 ↗
59. 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.07.01610.1016/j.actbio.2020.07.016 ↗
60. Al-Darkazly IAA. Optimization of mechanical properties of alginate hydrogel for 3D bio-printing self-standing scaffold architecture for tissue engineering applications. Int J Biomed Biol Eng, 2020; 14:419–427.
61. Lee W, , Ostadi Moghaddam A, , Shen S, et al. An optomechanogram for assessment of the structural and mechanical properties of tissues. Sci Rep, 2021; 11:1–12.
62. Feig VR, , Tran H, , Lee M, et al. Mechanically tunable conductive interpenetrating network hydrogels that mimic the elastic moduli of biological tissue. Nat Commun, 2018; 9:1–9.
63. 10.1007/s40778-016-0039-310.1007/s40778-016-0039-3 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.mtchem.2018.11.00310.1016/j.mtchem.2018.11.003 ↗
65. 10.1088/1758-5090/aac70b10.1088/1758-5090/aac70b ↗
66. Fisch P, , Holub M, , Zenobi-Wong M. Improved accuracy and precision of bioprinting through progressive cavity pump-controlled extrusion. Biofabrication, 2020; 13. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/ABC39B.
67. 10.1089/ten.tea.2017.033410.1089/ten.tea.2017.0334 ↗
68. 10.3389/fbioe.2021.70177810.3389/fbioe.2021.701778 ↗