Abstract
AbstractThere have been a number of recently reported approaches for the manufacture of complex 3D printed cell‐containing hydrogels. Given the fragility of the parts during manufacturing, the most successful approaches use a supportive particulate gel bed and have enabled the production of complex gel structures previously unattainable using other 3D printing methods. The supporting gel bed provides protection to the fragile printed part during the printing process, preventing the structure from collapsing under its own weight prior to crosslinking. Despite the apparent similarity of the particulate beds, the way the particles are manufactured strongly influences how they interact with one another and the part during fabrication, with implications to the quality of the final product. Recently, the process of suspended layer additive manufacture (SLAM) is demonstrated to create a structure that recapitulated the osteochondral region by printing into an agarose particulate gel. The manufacturing process for this gel (the application of shear during gelation) produced a self‐healing gel with rapid recovery of its elastic properties following disruption. Here, the physical characteristics of the supporting fluid‐gel matrix used in SLAM are explored, and compared to other particulate gel supporting beds, highlighting its potential for producing complex hydrogel‐based parts.
Highlights
This prevents the production of large, geometrically complex structures whilst maintaining shape fidelity
An agarose fluid-gel print matrix was used to enable the printing of complex geometries from low viscosity solutions (Figure S1, Supporting Information) by suspending the printed construct in its liquid form prior to gelation and extraction from the print bed (Figure 1)
The construct was removed from the fluid-gel print bed and any excess fluid gel removed by gently washing with deionized water
Summary
This prevents the production of large, geometrically complex structures whilst maintaining shape fidelity. The fabrication of functional tissues using extrusion-based bio- and controlling variations in microstructure to replicate comprinting remains a challenge despite recent advancements in 3D plex tissue within a single scaffold is difficult to achieve with (three-dimensional) bioprinting technologies. This is largely due these materials, as once a layer is crosslinked it is difficult to to the complexity of tissues which are anisotropically structured integrate the subsequent layers. Bioprinting requires a bioink (material collapse of the structure prior to gelation.[5,6,7] This can, formulation including biological molecules or cells) with three require increased extrusion pressures to deposit the material, subsequently reducing cell viability and can impact on cell
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
