1932

Abstract

Over the past several decades, there has been an ever-increasing demand for organ transplants. However, there is a severe shortage of donor organs, and as a result of the increasing demand, the gap between supply and demand continues to widen. A potential solution to this problem is to grow or fabricate organs using biomaterial scaffolds and a person's own cells. Although the realization of this solution has been limited, the development of new biofabrication approaches has made it more realistic. This review provides an overview of natural and synthetic biomaterials that have been used for organ/tissue development. It then discusses past and current biofabrication techniques, with a brief explanation of the state of the art. Finally, the review highlights the need for combining vascularization strategies with current biofabrication techniques. Given the multitude of applications of biofabrication technologies, from organ/tissue development to drug discovery/screening to development of complex in vitro models of human diseases, these manufacturing technologies can have a significant impact on the future of medicine and health care.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071813-105155
2014-07-11
2024-05-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/bioeng/16/1/annurev-bioeng-071813-105155.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071813-105155&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. US Dep. Health Hum. Serv 2014. The need is real: data. Donate the Gift of Life Statistics and Figures, US Dep. Health Hum. Serv., Washington, DC, retrieved February 26, 2014. http://www.organdonor.gov/about/data.html
  2. Langer R, Vacanti JP. 2.  1993. Tissue engineering. Science 260:920–26 [Google Scholar]
  3. Nerem RM. 3.  1991. Cellular engineering. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 19:529–45 [Google Scholar]
  4. Compton CC, Butler CE, Yannas IV, Warland G, Orgill DP. 4.  1998. Organized skin structure is regenerated in vivo from collagen-GAG matrices seeded with autologous keratinocytes. J. Investig. Dermatol. 110:908–16 [Google Scholar]
  5. Vunjak-Novakovic G, Obradovic B, Martin I, Bursac PM, Langer R, Freed LE. 5.  1998. Dynamic cell seeding of polymer scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering. Biotechnol. Prog. 14:193–202 [Google Scholar]
  6. Jungebluth P, Alici E, Baiguera S, Le Blanc K, Blomberg P. 6.  et al. 2011. Tracheobronchial transplantation with a stem-cell-seeded bioartificial nanocomposite: a proof-of-concept study. Lancet 378:1997–2004 [Google Scholar]
  7. Atala A, Bauer SB, Soker S, Yoo JJ, Retik AB. 7.  2006. Tissue-engineered autologous bladders for patients needing cystoplasty. Lancet 367:1241–46 [Google Scholar]
  8. Lovett M, Lee K, Edwards A, Kaplan DL. 8.  2009. Vascularization strategies for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 15:353–70 [Google Scholar]
  9. Huebsch N, Arany PR, Mao AS, Shvartsman D, Ali OA. 9.  et al. 2010. Harnessing traction-mediated manipulation of the cell/matrix interface to control stem-cell fate. Nat. Mater. 9:518–26 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gill BJ, Gibbons DL, Roudsari LC, Saik JE, Rizvi ZH. 10.  et al. 2012. A synthetic matrix with independently tunable biochemistry and mechanical properties to study epithelial morphogenesis and EMT in a lung adenocarcinoma model. Cancer Res. 72:6013–23 [Google Scholar]
  11. Khetan S, Burdick JA. 11.  2010. Patterning network structure to spatially control cellular remodeling and stem cell fate within 3-dimensional hydrogels. Biomaterials 31:8228–34 [Google Scholar]
  12. Naito H, Yoshimura M, Mizuno T, Takasawa S, Tojo T, Taniguchi S. 12.  2013. The advantages of three-dimensional culture in a collagen hydrogel for stem cell differentiation. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 101:2838–45 [Google Scholar]
  13. Baker BM, Chen CS. 13.  2012. Deconstructing the third dimension: how 3D culture microenvironments alter cellular cues. J. Cell Sci. 125:3015–24 [Google Scholar]
  14. Pataky K, Braschler T, Negro A, Renaud P, Lutolf MP, Brugger J. 14.  2012. Microdrop printing of hydrogel bioinks into 3D tissue-like geometries. Adv. Mater. 24:391–96 [Google Scholar]
  15. Culver JC, Hoffmann JC, Poche RA, Slater JH, West JL, Dickinson ME. 15.  2012. Three-dimensional biomimetic patterning in hydrogels to guide cellular organization. Adv. Mater. 24:2344–48 [Google Scholar]
  16. Edalat F, Sheu I, Manoucheri S, Khademhosseini A. 16.  2012. Material strategies for creating artificial cell-instructive niches. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 23:820–25 [Google Scholar]
  17. Buchanan CF, Voigt EE, Szot CS, Freeman JW, Vlachos PP, Rylander MN. 17.  2014. Three-dimensional microfluidic collagen hydrogels for investigating flow-mediated tumor-endothelial signaling and vascular organization. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 20:64–75 [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang L, Yuan T, Guo L, Zhang X. 18.  2012. An in vitro study of collagen hydrogel to induce the chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 100:2717–25 [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang X, Xu L, Huang X, Wei S, Zhai M. 19.  2012. Structural study and preliminary biological evaluation on the collagen hydrogel crosslinked by γ-irradiation. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 100:2960–69 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hwang CM, Ay B, Kaplan DL, Rubin JP, Marra KG. 20.  et al. 2013. Assessments of injectable alginate particle-embedded fibrin hydrogels for soft tissue reconstruction. Biomed. Mater. 8:014105 [Google Scholar]
  21. McCall AD, Nelson JW, Leigh NJ, Duffey ME, Lei P. 21.  et al. 2013. Growth factors polymerized within fibrin hydrogel promote amylase production in parotid cells. Tissue Eng. Part A 19:2215–25 [Google Scholar]
  22. Thomson KS, Korte FS, Giachelli CM, Ratner BD, Regnier M, Scatena M. 22.  2013. Prevascularized microtemplated fibrin scaffolds for cardiac tissue engineering applications. Tissue Eng. Part A 19:967–77 [Google Scholar]
  23. Burdick JA, Chung C, Jia X, Randolph MA, Langer R. 23.  2005. Controlled degradation and mechanical behavior of photopolymerized hyaluronic acid networks. Biomacromolecules 6:386–91 [Google Scholar]
  24. Burdick JA, Prestwich GD. 24.  2011. Hyaluronic acid hydrogels for biomedical applications. Adv. Mater. 23:H41–56 [Google Scholar]
  25. Liu Y, Charles LF, Zarembinski TI, Johnson KI, Atzet SK. 25.  et al. 2012. Modified hyaluronan hydrogels support the maintenance of mouse embryonic stem cells and human induced pluripotent stem cells. Macromol. Biosci. 12:1034–42 [Google Scholar]
  26. Suri S, Schmidt CE. 26.  2009. Photopatterned collagen-hyaluronic acid interpenetrating polymer network hydrogels. Acta Biomater. 5:2385–97 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jin L, Feng T, Shih HP, Zerda R, Luo A. 27.  et al. 2013. Colony-forming cells in the adult mouse pancreas are expandable in Matrigel and form endocrine/acinar colonies in laminin hydrogel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110:3907–12 [Google Scholar]
  28. Schumann P, Lindhorst D, Von See C, Menzel N, Kampmann A. 28.  et al. 2014. Accelerating the early angiogenesis of tissue engineering constructs in vivo by the use of stem cells cultured in Matrigel. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 102:1652–62 [Google Scholar]
  29. Sodunke TR, Turner KK, Caldwell SA, McBride KW, Reginato MJ, Noh HM. 29.  2007. Micropatterns of Matrigel for three-dimensional epithelial cultures. Biomaterials 28:4006–16 [Google Scholar]
  30. Aizawa Y, Wylie R, Shoichet M. 30.  2010. Endothelial cell guidance in 3D patterned scaffolds. Adv. Mater. 22:4831–35 [Google Scholar]
  31. Luo Y, Shoichet MS. 31.  2004. A photolabile hydrogel for guided three-dimensional cell growth and migration. Nat. Mater. 3:249–53 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hughes CS, Postovit LM, Lajoie GA. 32.  2010. Matrigel: a complex protein mixture required for optimal growth of cell culture. Proteomics 10:1886–90 [Google Scholar]
  33. Guvendiren M, Burdick JA. 33.  2010. The control of stem cell morphology and differentiation by hydrogel surface wrinkles. Biomaterials 31:6511–18 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hanson Shepherd JN, Parker ST, Shepherd RF, Gillette MU, Lewis JA, Nuzzo RG. 34.  2011. 3D micro-periodic hydrogel scaffolds for robust neuronal cultures. Adv. Funct. Mater. 21:47–54 [Google Scholar]
  35. Barry RA, Shepherd RF, Hanson JN, Nuzzo RG, Wiltzius P, Lewis JA. 35.  2009. Direct-write assembly of 3D hydrogel scaffolds for guided cell growth. Adv. Mater. 21:2407–10 [Google Scholar]
  36. Tekin H, Sanchez JG, Landeros C, Dubbin K, Langer R, Khademhosseini A. 36.  2012. Controlling spatial organization of multiple cell types in defined 3D geometries. Adv. Mater. 24:5543–47 [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhu JM. 37.  2010. Bioactive modification of poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 31:4639–56 [Google Scholar]
  38. Chan BK, Wippich CC, Wu CJ, Sivasankar PM, Schmidt G. 38.  2012. Robust and semi-interpenetrating hydrogels from poly(ethylene glycol) and collagen for elastomeric tissue scaffolds. Macromol. Biosci. 12:1490–501 [Google Scholar]
  39. Hong Y, Huber A, Takanari K, Amoroso NJ, Hashizume R. 39.  et al. 2011. Mechanical properties and in vivo behavior of a biodegradable synthetic polymer microfiber-extracellular matrix hydrogel biohybrid scaffold. Biomaterials 32:3387–94 [Google Scholar]
  40. Sui ZJ, King WJ, Murphy WL. 40.  2007. Dynamic materials based on a protein conformational change. Adv. Mater. 19:3377–80 [Google Scholar]
  41. Annabi N, Tsang K, Mithieux SM, Nikkhah M, Ameri A. 41.  et al. 2013. Highly elastic micropatterned hydrogel for engineering functional cardiac tissue. Adv. Funct. Mater. 23:4950–59 [Google Scholar]
  42. Rydholm AE, Anseth KS, Bowman CN. 42.  2007. Effects of neighboring sulfides and pH on ester hydrolysis in thiol-acrylate photopolymers. Acta Biomater. 3:449–55 [Google Scholar]
  43. Martens P, Metters AT, Anseth KS, Bowman CN. 43.  2001. A generalized bulk-degradation model for hydrogel networks formed from multivinyl cross-linking molecules. J. Phys. Chem. B 105:5131–38 [Google Scholar]
  44. Metters AT, Anseth KS, Bowman CN. 44.  2000. Fundamental studies of a novel, biodegradable PEG-b-PLA hydrogel. Polymer 41:3993–4004 [Google Scholar]
  45. Shih H, Lin CC. 45.  2012. Cross-linking and degradation of step-growth hydrogels formed by thiol-ene photoclick chemistry. Biomacromolecules 13:2003–12 [Google Scholar]
  46. Cho E, Kutty JK, Datar K, Lee JS, Vyavahare NR, Webb K. 46.  2009. A novel synthetic route for the preparation of hydrolytically degradable synthetic hydrogels. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 90A:1073–82 [Google Scholar]
  47. Elbert DL, Pratt AB, Lutolf MP, Halstenberg S, Hubbell JA. 47.  2001. Protein delivery from materials formed by self-selective conjugate addition reactions. J. Control. Release 76:11–25 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rydholm AE, Bowman CN, Anseth KS. 48.  2005. Degradable thiol-acrylate photopolymers: polymerization and degradation behavior of an in situ forming biomaterial. Biomaterials 26:4495–506 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rydholm AE, Reddy SK, Anseth KS, Bowman CN. 49.  2007. Development and characterization of degradable thiol-allyl ether photopolymers. Polymer 48:4589–600 [Google Scholar]
  50. Khetan S, Guvendiren M, Legant WR, Cohen DM, Chen CS, Burdick JA. 50.  2013. Degradation-mediated cellular traction directs stem cell fate in covalently crosslinked three-dimensional hydrogels. Nat. Mater. 12:458–65 [Google Scholar]
  51. Miller JS, Shen CJ, Legant WR, Baranski JD, Blakely BL, Chen CS. 51.  2010. Bioactive hydrogels made from step-growth derived PEG-peptide macromers. Biomaterials 31:3736–43 [Google Scholar]
  52. West JL, Hubbell JA. 52.  1998. Polymeric biomaterials with degradation sites for proteases involved in cell migration. Macromolecules 32:241–44 [Google Scholar]
  53. Jo YS, Rizzi SC, Ehrbar M, Weber FE, Hubbell JA, Lutolf MP. 53.  2010. Biomimetic PEG hydrogels crosslinked with minimal plasmin-sensitive tri-amino acid peptides. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 93:870–77 [Google Scholar]
  54. Halstenberg S, Panitch A, Rizzi S, Hall H, Hubbell JA. 54.  2002. Biologically engineered protein-graft-poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels: a cell adhesive and plasmin-degradable biosynthetic material for tissue repair. Biomacromolecules 3:710–23 [Google Scholar]
  55. Patterson J, Hubbell JA. 55.  2010. Enhanced proteolytic degradation of molecularly engineered PEG hydrogels in response to MMP-1 and MMP-2. Biomaterials 31:7836–45 [Google Scholar]
  56. Aubin H, Nichol JW, Hutson CB, Bae H, Sieminski AL. 56.  et al. 2010. Directed 3D cell alignment and elongation in microengineered hydrogels. Biomaterials 31:6941–51 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mironov V, Prestwich G, Forgacs G. 57.  2007. Bioprinting living structures. J. Mater. Chem. 17:2054–60 [Google Scholar]
  58. Cuchiara MP, Gould DJ, McHale MK, Dickinson ME, West JL. 58.  2012. Integration of self-assembled microvascular networks with microfabricated peg-based hydrogels. Adv. Funct. Mater. 22:4511–18 [Google Scholar]
  59. Moon JJ, Lee SH, West JL. 59.  2007. Synthetic biomimetic hydrogels incorporated with ephrin-A1 for therapeutic angiogenesis. Biomacromolecules 8:42–49 [Google Scholar]
  60. Killops KL, Campos LM, Hawker CJ. 60.  2008. Robust, efficient, and orthogonal synthesis of dendrimers via thiol-ene “click” chemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130:5062–64 [Google Scholar]
  61. Polizzotti BD, Fairbanks BD, Anseth KS. 61.  2008. Three-dimensional biochemical patterning of click-based composite hydrogels via thiolene photopolymerization. Biomacromolecules 9:1084–87 [Google Scholar]
  62. Fairbanks BD, Scott TF, Kloxin CJ, Anseth KS, Bowman CN. 62.  2009. Thiol-yne photopolymerizations: novel mechanism, kinetics, and step-growth formation of highly cross-linked networks. Macromolecules 42:211–17 [Google Scholar]
  63. Lomba M, Oriol L, Alcala R, Sanchez C, Moros M. 63.  et al. 2011. In situ photopolymerization of biomaterials by thiol-yne click chemistry. Macromol. Biosci. 11:1505–14 [Google Scholar]
  64. Lutolf MP, Hubbell JA. 64.  2003. Synthesis and physicochemical characterization of end-linked poly(ethylene glycol)-co-peptide hydrogels formed by Michael-type addition. Biomacromolecules 4:713–22 [Google Scholar]
  65. Seliktar D, Zisch AH, Lutolf MP, Wrana JL, Hubbell JA. 65.  2004. MMP-2 sensitive, VEGF-bearing bioactive hydrogels for promotion of vascular healing. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 68:704–16 [Google Scholar]
  66. DeForest CA, Anseth KS. 66.  2011. Cytocompatible click-based hydrogels with dynamically tunable properties through orthogonal photoconjugation and photocleavage reactions. Nat. Chem. 3:925–31 [Google Scholar]
  67. DeForest CA, Anseth KS. 67.  2012. Photoreversible patterning of biomolecules within click-based hydrogels. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51:1816–19 [Google Scholar]
  68. DeForest CA, Polizzotti BD, Anseth KS. 68.  2009. Sequential click reactions for synthesizing and patterning three-dimensional cell microenvironments. Nat. Mater. 8:659–64 [Google Scholar]
  69. Deforest CA, Sims EA, Anseth KS. 69.  2010. Peptide-functionalized click hydrogels with independently tunable mechanics and chemical functionality for 3D cell culture. Chem. Mater. 22:4783–90 [Google Scholar]
  70. Annabi N, Nichol JW, Zhong X, Ji C, Koshy S. 70.  et al. 2010. Controlling the porosity and microarchitecture of hydrogels for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 16:371–83 [Google Scholar]
  71. Mikos AG, Thorsen AJ, Czerwonka LA, Bao Y, Langer R. 71.  et al. 1994. Preparation and characterization of poly(l-lactic acid) foams. Polymer 35:1068–77 [Google Scholar]
  72. Mehrabanian M, Nasr-Esfahani M. 72.  2011. HA/nylon 6,6 porous scaffolds fabricated by salt-leaching/solvent casting technique: effect of nano-sized filler content on scaffold properties. Int. J. Nanomed. 6:1651–59 [Google Scholar]
  73. Park JS, Woo DG, Sun BK, Chung H-M, Im SJ. 73.  et al. 2007. In vitro and in vivo test of PEG/PCL-based hydrogel scaffold for cell delivery application. J. Control. Release 124:51–59 [Google Scholar]
  74. Ford MC, Bertram JP, Hynes SR, Michaud M, Li Q. 74.  et al. 2006. A macroporous hydrogel for the coculture of neural progenitor and endothelial cells to form functional vascular networks in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103:2512–17 [Google Scholar]
  75. Madihally SV, Matthew HWT. 75.  1999. Porous chitosan scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 20:1133–42 [Google Scholar]
  76. Hsu Y-Y, Gresser JD, Trantolo DJ, Lyons CM, Gangadharam PRJ, Wise DL. 76.  1997. Effect of polymer foam morphology and density on kinetics of in vitro controlled release of isoniazid from compressed foam matrices. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 35:107–16 [Google Scholar]
  77. Kang H-W, Tabata Y, Ikada Y. 77.  1999. Effect of porous structure on the degradation of freeze-dried gelatin hydrogels. J. Bioact. Compat. Polym. 14:331–43 [Google Scholar]
  78. Kang H-W, Tabata Y, Ikada Y. 78.  1999. Fabrication of porous gelatin scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 20:1339–44 [Google Scholar]
  79. Shapiro L, Cohen S. 79.  1997. Novel alginate sponges for cell culture and transplantation. Biomaterials 18:583–90 [Google Scholar]
  80. Miyata T, Sohde T, Rubin AL, Stenzel KH. 80.  1971. Effects of ultraviolet irradiation on native and telopeptide-poor collagen. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 229:672–80 [Google Scholar]
  81. Peng Z, Chen F. 81.  2010. Hydroxyethyl cellulose-based hydrogels with various pore sizes prepared by freeze-drying. J. Macromol. Sci. Part B Phys. 50:340–49 [Google Scholar]
  82. Lai J-Y, Ma DH-K, Lai M-H, Li Y-T, Chang R-J, Chen L-M. 82.  2013. Characterization of cross-linked porous gelatin carriers and their interaction with corneal endothelium: biopolymer concentration effect. PLoS ONE 8:e54058 [Google Scholar]
  83. Ho M-H, Kuo P-Y, Hsieh H-J, Hsien T-Y, Hou L-T. 83.  et al. 2004. Preparation of porous scaffolds by using freeze-extraction and freeze-gelation methods. Biomaterials 25:129–38 [Google Scholar]
  84. Quirk RA, France RM, Shakesheff KM, Howdle SM. 84.  2004. Supercritical fluid technologies and tissue engineering scaffolds. Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 8:313–21 [Google Scholar]
  85. Zellander A, Gemeinhart R, Djalilian A, Makhsous M, Sun S, Cho M. 85.  2013. Designing a gas foamed scaffold for keratoprosthesis. Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl. 33:3396–403 [Google Scholar]
  86. Haugen H, Reid V, Brunner M, Will J, Wintermantel E. 86.  2004. Water as a foaming agent for open cell polyurethane structures. J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Med. 15:343–46 [Google Scholar]
  87. Mooney DJ, Baldwin DF, Suh NP, Vacanti JP, Langer R. 87.  1996. Novel approach to fabricate porous sponges of poly(d,l-lactic-co-glycolic acid) without the use of organic solvents. Biomaterials 17:1417–22 [Google Scholar]
  88. Sachlos E, Czernuszka JT. 88.  2003. Making tissue engineering scaffolds work. Review: The application of solid freeform fabrication technology to the production of tissue engineering scaffolds. Eur. Cells Mater. 5:29–40 [Google Scholar]
  89. Harris LD, Kim BS, Mooney DJ. 89.  1998. Open pore biodegradable matrices formed with gas foaming. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 42:396–402 [Google Scholar]
  90. Kim H, Park I, Kim J, Cho C, Kim M. 90.  2012. Gas foaming fabrication of porous biphasic calcium phosphate for bone regeneration. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 9:63–68 [Google Scholar]
  91. Nam YS, Yoon JJ, Park TG. 91.  2000. A novel fabrication method of macroporous biodegradable polymer scaffolds using gas foaming salt as a porogen additive. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 53:1–7 [Google Scholar]
  92. Mironov V, Visconti RP, Kasyanov V, Forgacs G, Drake CJ, Markwald RR. 92.  2009. Organ printing: tissue spheroids as building blocks. Biomaterials 30:2164–74 [Google Scholar]
  93. Norotte C, Marga FS, Niklason LE, Forgacs G. 93.  2009. Scaffold-free vascular tissue engineering using bioprinting. Biomaterials 30:5910–17 [Google Scholar]
  94. Boland T, Xu T, Damon B, Cui X. 94.  2006. Application of inkjet printing to tissue engineering. Biotechnol. J. 1:910–17 [Google Scholar]
  95. Xu T, Jin J, Gregory C, Hickman JJ, Boland T. 95.  2005. Inkjet printing of viable mammalian cells. Biomaterials 26:93–99 [Google Scholar]
  96. Cui XF, Boland T. 96.  2009. Human microvasculature fabrication using thermal inkjet printing technology. Biomaterials 30:6221–27 [Google Scholar]
  97. Villar G, Graham AD, Bayley H. 97.  2013. A tissue-like printed material. Science 340:48–52 [Google Scholar]
  98. Lewis JA. 98.  2006. Direct ink writing of 3D functional materials. Adv. Funct. Mater. 16:2193–204 [Google Scholar]
  99. Smay JE, Gratson GM, Shepherd RF, Cesarano J, Lewis JA. 99.  2002. Directed colloidal assembly of 3D periodic structures. Adv. Mater. 14:1279–83 [Google Scholar]
  100. Duoss EB, Twardowski M, Lewis JA. 100.  2007. Sol-gel inks for direct-write assembly of functional oxides. Adv. Mater. 19:3485–89 [Google Scholar]
  101. Sun J, Tang J, Ding J. 101.  2009. Cell orientation on a stripe-micropatterned surface. Chin. Sci. Bull. 54:3154–59 [Google Scholar]
  102. Lee S-H, Moon JJ, West JL. 102.  2008. Three-dimensional micropatterning of bioactive hydrogels via two-photon laser scanning photolithography for guided 3D cell migration. Biomaterials 29:2962–68 [Google Scholar]
  103. Williams CG, Malik AN, Kim TK, Manson PN, Elisseeff JH. 103.  2005. Variable cytocompatibility of six cell lines with photoinitiators used for polymerizing hydrogels and cell encapsulation. Biomaterials 26:1211–18 [Google Scholar]
  104. Liu Tsang V, Chen AA, Cho LM, Jadin KD, Sah RL. 104.  et al. 2007. Fabrication of 3D hepatic tissues by additive photopatterning of cellular hydrogels. FASEB J. 21:790–801 [Google Scholar]
  105. Hahn MS, Miller JS, West JL. 105.  2006. Three-dimensional biochemical and biomechanical patterning of hydrogels for guiding cell behavior. Adv. Mater. 18:2679–84 [Google Scholar]
  106. Bajaj P, Marchwiany D, Duarte C, Bashir R. 106.  2013. Patterned three-dimensional encapsulation of embryonic stem cells using dielectrophoresis and stereolithography. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2:450–58 [Google Scholar]
  107. Zorlutuna P, Jeong JH, Kong H, Bashir R. 107.  2011. Stereolithography-based hydrogel microenvironments to examine cellular interactions. Adv. Funct. Mater. 21:3642–51 [Google Scholar]
  108. Bryant SJ, Nuttelman CR, Anseth KS. 108.  2000. Cytocompatibility of UV and visible light photoinitiating systems on cultured NIH/3T3 fibroblasts in vitro. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 11:439–57 [Google Scholar]
  109. Miller GA, Gou L, Narayanan V, Scranton AB. 109.  2002. Modeling of photobleaching for the photoinitiation of thick polymerization systems. J. Polym. Sci. Part A Polym. Chem. 40:793–808 [Google Scholar]
  110. Terrones G, Pearlstein AJ. 110.  2001. Effects of kinetics and optical attenuation on the completeness, uniformity, and dynamics of monomer conversion in free-radical photopolymerizations. Macromolecules 34:8894–906 [Google Scholar]
  111. Ivanov VV, Decker C. 111.  2001. Kinetic study of photoinitiated frontal polymerization. Polym. Int. 50:113–18 [Google Scholar]
  112. Fukuda J, Khademhosseini A, Yeo Y, Yang X, Yeh J. 112.  et al. 2006. Micromolding of photocrosslinkable chitosan hydrogel for spheroid microarray and co-cultures. Biomaterials 27:5259–67 [Google Scholar]
  113. Khademhosseini A, Eng G, Yeh J, Fukuda J, Blumling J. 113.  et al. 2006. Micromolding of photocrosslinkable hyaluronic acid for cell encapsulation and entrapment. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 79A:522–32 [Google Scholar]
  114. Liu VA, Bhatia SN. 114.  2002. Three-dimensional photopatterning of hydrogels containing living cells. Biomed. Microdevices 4:257–66 [Google Scholar]
  115. Yeh J, Ling Y, Karp JM, Gantz J, Chandawarkar A. 115.  et al. 2006. Micromolding of shape-controlled, harvestable cell-laden hydrogels. Biomaterials 27:5391–98 [Google Scholar]
  116. Bajaj P, Tang X, Saif TA, Bashir R. 116.  2010. Stiffness of the substrate influences the phenotype of embryonic chicken cardiac myocytes. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 95A:1261–69 [Google Scholar]
  117. Discher DE, Janmey Wang P. 117.  2005. Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science 310:1139–43 [Google Scholar]
  118. Bajaj P, Reddy B, Millet L, Wei C, Zorlutuna P. 118.  et al. 2011. Patterning the differentiation of C2C12 skeletal myoblasts. Integr. Biol. 3:897–909 [Google Scholar]
  119. McBeath R, Pirone DM, Nelson CM, Bhadriraju K, Chen CS. 119.  2004. Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev. Cell 6:483–95 [Google Scholar]
  120. Ghibaudo M, Trichet L, Le Digabel J, Richert A, Hersen P, Ladoux B. 120.  2009. Substrate topography induces a crossover from 2D to 3D behavior in fibroblast migration. Biophys. J. 97:357–68 [Google Scholar]
  121. Chen W, Villa-Diaz LG, Sun Y, Weng S, Kim JK. 121.  et al. 2012. Nanotopography influences adhesion, spreading, and self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells. ACS Nano 6:4094–103 [Google Scholar]
  122. Kim D-H, Provenzano PP, Smith CL, Levchenko A. 122.  2012. Matrix nanotopography as a regulator of cell function. J. Cell Biol. 197:351–60 [Google Scholar]
  123. Bajaj P, Khang D, Webster TJ. 123.  2006. Control of spatial cell attachment on carbon nanofiber patterns on polycarbonate urethane. Int. J. Nanomed. 1:361–65 [Google Scholar]
  124. Deligianni DD, Katsala ND, Koutsoukos PG, Missirlis YF. 124.  2000. Effect of surface roughness of hydroxyapatite on human bone marrow cell adhesion, proliferation, differentiation and detachment strength. Biomaterials 22:87–96 [Google Scholar]
  125. Dowling DP, Miller IS, Ardhaoui M, Gallagher WM. 125.  2011. Effect of surface wettability and topography on the adhesion of osteosarcoma cells on plasma-modified polystyrene. J. Biomater. Appl. 26:327–47 [Google Scholar]
  126. Lampin M, Warocquier-Clérout R, Legris C, Degrange M, Sigot-Luizard MF. 126.  1997. Correlation between substratum roughness and wettability, cell adhesion, and cell migration. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 36:99–108 [Google Scholar]
  127. Ross AM, Jiang Z, Bastmeyer M, Lahann J. 127.  2012. Physical aspects of cell culture substrates: topography, roughness, and elasticity. Small 8:336–55 [Google Scholar]
  128. Ward M, Dembo M, Hammer D. 128.  1995. Kinetics of cell detachment: effect of ligand density. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 23:322–31 [Google Scholar]
  129. Zheng X, Cheung LS-L, Schroeder JA, Jiang L, Zohar Y. 129.  2011. Cell receptor and surface ligand density effects on dynamic states of adhering circulating tumor cells. Lab Chip 11:3431–39 [Google Scholar]
  130. Marklein RA, Burdick JA. 130.  2010. Spatially controlled hydrogel mechanics to modulate stem cell interactions. Soft Matter 6:136–43 [Google Scholar]
  131. Burdick JA, Khademhosseini A, Langer R. 131.  2004. Fabrication of gradient hydrogels using a microfluidics/photopolymerization process. Langmuir 20:5153–56 [Google Scholar]
  132. Lanniel M, Huq E, Allen S, Buttery L, Williams PM, Alexander MR. 132.  2011. Substrate induced differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells on hydrogels with modified surface chemistry and controlled modulus. Soft Matter 7:6501–14 [Google Scholar]
  133. Nichol JW, Koshy ST, Bae H, Hwang CM, Yamanlar S, Khademhosseini A. 133.  2010. Cell-laden microengineered gelatin methacrylate hydrogels. Biomaterials 31:5536–44 [Google Scholar]
  134. Engler AJ, Sen S, Sweeney HL, Discher DE. 134.  2006. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 126:677–89 [Google Scholar]
  135. Occhetta P, Sadr N, Piraino F, Redaelli A, Moretti M, Rasponi M. 135.  2013. Fabrication of 3D cell-laden hydrogel microstructures through photo-mold patterning. Biofabrication 5:1–10 [Google Scholar]
  136. Bryant SJ, Cuy JL, Hauch KD, Ratner BD. 136.  2007. Photo-patterning of porous hydrogels for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 28:2978–86 [Google Scholar]
  137. Hammoudi TM, Lu H, Temenoff JS. 137.  2010. Long-term spatially defined coculture within three-dimensional photopatterned hydrogels. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 16:1621–28 [Google Scholar]
  138. Melchels FPW, Feijen J, Grijpma DW. 138.  2010. A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials 31:6121–30 [Google Scholar]
  139. Lantada AD, Morgado PL. 139.  2012. Rapid prototyping for biomedical engineering: current capabilities and challenges. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 14:73–96 [Google Scholar]
  140. Bajaj P, Chan V, Jae Hyun J, Zorlutuna P, Hyunjoon K, Bashir R. 140.  2012. 3-D biofabrication using stereolithography for biology and medicine. Conf. Proc. Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. (EMBC), Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE, San Diego6805–8 New York: IEEE [Google Scholar]
  141. Dhariwala B, Hunt E, Boland T. 141.  2004. Rapid prototyping of tissue-engineering constructs, using photopolymerizable hydrogels and stereolithography. Tissue Eng. 10:1316–22 [Google Scholar]
  142. Arcaute K, Mann BK, Wicker RB. 142.  2006. Stereolithography of three-dimensional bioactive poly(ethylene glycol) constructs with encapsulated cells. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 34:1429–41 [Google Scholar]
  143. Chan V, Zorlutuna P, Jeong JH, Kong H, Bashir R. 143.  2010. Three-dimensional photopatterning of hydrogels using stereolithography for long-term cell encapsulation. Lab Chip 10:2062–70 [Google Scholar]
  144. Seck TM, Melchels FPW, Feijen J, Grijpma DW. 144.  2010. Designed biodegradable hydrogel structures prepared by stereolithography using poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(d,l-lactide)-based resins. J. Control. Release 148:34–41 [Google Scholar]
  145. Jeong JH, Chan V, Cha C, Zorlutuna P, Dyck C. 145.  et al. 2012. “Living” microvascular stamp for patterning of functional neovessels; orchestrated control of matrix property and geometry. Adv. Mater. 24:58–63 [Google Scholar]
  146. Melchels FPW, Feijen J, Grijpma DW. 146.  2009. A poly(d,l-lactide) resin for the preparation of tissue engineering scaffolds by stereolithography. Biomaterials 30:3801–9 [Google Scholar]
  147. Lee S-J, Kang H-W, Park J, Rhie J-W, Hahn S, Cho D-W. 147.  2008. Application of microstereolithography in the development of three-dimensional cartilage regeneration scaffolds. Biomed. Microdevices 10:233–41 [Google Scholar]
  148. Leigh SJ, Gilbert HTJ, Barker IA, Becker JM, Richardson SM. 148.  et al. 2012. Fabrication of 3-dimensional cellular constructs via microstereolithography using a simple, three-component, poly(ethylene glycol) acrylate-based system. Biomacromolecules 14:186–92 [Google Scholar]
  149. Zhang AP, Qu X, Soman P, Hribar KC, Lee JW. 149.  et al. 2012. Rapid fabrication of complex 3D extracellular microenvironments by dynamic optical projection stereolithography. Adv. Mater. 24:4266–70 [Google Scholar]
  150. Maruo S, Ikuta K. 150.  2002. Submicron stereolithography for the production of freely movable mechanisms by using single-photon polymerization. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 100:70–76 [Google Scholar]
  151. Chan V, Park K, Collens MB, Kong H, Saif TA, Bashir R. 151.  2012. Development of miniaturized walking biological machines. Sci. Rep. 2:857 [Google Scholar]
  152. Musoke-Zawedde P, Shoichet MS. 152.  2006. Anisotropic three-dimensional peptide channels guide neurite outgrowth within a biodegradable hydrogel matrix. Biomed. Mater. 1:162–69 [Google Scholar]
  153. Denk W, Strickler JH, Webb WW. 153.  1990. Two-photon laser scanning fluorescence microscopy. Science 248:73–76 [Google Scholar]
  154. Zipfel WR, Williams RM, Webb WW. 154.  2003. Nonlinear magic: multiphoton microscopy in the biosciences. Nat. Biotechnol. 21:1369–77 [Google Scholar]
  155. Hoffmann JC, West JL. 155.  2010. Three-dimensional photolithographic patterning of multiple bioactive ligands in poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels. Soft Matter 6:5056–63 [Google Scholar]
  156. Wosnick JH, Shoichet MS. 156.  2008. Three-dimensional chemical patterning of transparent hydrogels. Chem. Mater. 20:55–60 [Google Scholar]
  157. Wylie RG, Shoichet MS. 157.  2008. Two-photon micropatterning of amines within an agarose hydrogel. J. Mater. Chem. 18:2716–21 [Google Scholar]
  158. Wylie RG, Shoichet MS. 158.  2011. Three-dimensional spatial patterning of proteins in hydrogels. Biomacromolecules 12:3789–96 [Google Scholar]
  159. Wylie RG, Ahsan S, Aizawa Y, Maxwell KL, Morshead CM, Shoichet MS. 159.  2011. Spatially controlled simultaneous patterning of multiple growth factors in three-dimensional hydrogels. Nat. Mater. 10:799–806 [Google Scholar]
  160. Kloxin AM, Kasko AM, Salinas CN, Anseth KS. 160.  2009. Photodegradable hydrogels for dynamic tuning of physical and chemical properties. Science 324:59–63 [Google Scholar]
  161. Kaehr B, Allen R, Javier DJ, Currie J, Shear JB. 161.  2004. Guiding neuronal development with in situ microfabrication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:16104–8 [Google Scholar]
  162. Spikes JD, Shen HR, Kopeckova P, Kopecek J. 162.  1999. Photodynamic crosslinking of proteins. III. Kinetics of the FMN- and rose bengal-sensitized photooxidation and intermolecular crosslinking of model tyrosine-containing N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymers. Photochem. Photobiol. 70:130–37 [Google Scholar]
  163. Seidlits SK, Schmidt CE, Shear JB. 163.  2009. High-resolution patterning of hydrogels in three dimensions using direct-write photofabrication for cell guidance. Adv. Funct. Mater. 19:3543–51 [Google Scholar]
  164. Dankerl M, Hauf MV, Lippert A, Hess LH, Birner S. 164.  et al. 2010. Graphene solution-gated field-effect transistor array for sensing applications. Adv. Funct. Mater. 20:3117–24 [Google Scholar]
  165. Hess LH, Jansen M, Maybeck V, Hauf MV, Seifert M. 165.  et al. 2011. Graphene transistor arrays for recording action potentials from electrogenic cells. Adv. Mater. 23:5045–49 [Google Scholar]
  166. Viventi J, Kim D-H, Moss JD, Kim Y-S, Blanco JA. 166.  et al. 2010. A conformal, bio-interfaced class of silicon electronics for mapping cardiac electrophysiology. Sci. Transl. Med. 2:24ra22 [Google Scholar]
  167. Timko BP, Cohen-Karni T, Yu G, Qing Q, Tian B, Lieber CM. 167.  2009. Electrical recording from hearts with flexible nanowire device arrays. Nano Lett. 9:914–18 [Google Scholar]
  168. Tian B, Liu J, Dvir T, Jin L, Tsui JH. 168.  et al. 2012. Macroporous nanowire nanoelectronic scaffolds for synthetic tissues. Nat. Mater. 11:986–94 [Google Scholar]
  169. Shin SR, Jung SM, Zalabany M, Kim K, Zorlutuna P. 169.  et al. 2013. Carbon-nanotube-embedded hydrogel sheets for engineering cardiac constructs and bioactuators. ACS Nano 7:2369–80 [Google Scholar]
  170. Novosel EC, Kleinhans C, Kluger PJ. 170.  2011. Vascularization is the key challenge in tissue engineering. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 63:300–11 [Google Scholar]
  171. Neumann T, Nicholson BS, Sanders JE. 171.  2003. Tissue engineering of perfused microvessels. Microvasc. Res. 66:59–67 [Google Scholar]
  172. He J, Mao M, Liu Y, Shao J, Jin Z, Li D. 172.  2013. Fabrication of nature-inspired microfluidic network for perfusable tissue constructs. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2:1108–13 [Google Scholar]
  173. Miller JS, Stevens KR, Yang MT, Baker BM, Nguyen DH. 173.  et al. 2012. Rapid casting of patterned vascular networks for perfusable engineered three-dimensional tissues. Nat. Mater. 11:768–74 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071813-105155
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071813-105155
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error