137
of patient-specific vascular grafts. Computational analysis has improved not only
the physical parameters of printed grafts but has also helped in estimating flow
dynamics of the graft in vivo [47]. Those advancements have been indispensable to
the clinical application of the 3D printing constructs.
5.4 Conclusion
This chapter presents several 3D printing methodologies, including inkjet, extrusion, laser, and scaffold-free techniques, and their current applications in vascular
tissue fabrication. The ultimate clinical goal of 3D printing technologies is to
improve patient outcomes using 3D printed constructs. Despite the breakthroughs
and progress in 3D bioprinting and vascular tissue engineering, there are still many
technical and biological limitations that must be overcome. Further optimization
and innovation are needed in terms of the printing process, tissue regeneration, and
the biomaterials used. Multidisciplinary research will play a key role in addressing
these challenges and realizing the translation of 3D printing technology to clinical
practice.
References
1. Baudis, S., Nehl, F., Ligon, S. C., Nigisch, A., Bergmeister, H., Bernhard, D., et al. (2011).
Elastomeric degradable biomaterials by photopolymerization-based CAD-CAM for vascular
tissue engineering. Biomedical Materials, 6(5), 055003.
2. Blaeser, A., et al. (2013). Biofabrication under fluorocarbon: A novel freeform fabrication
technique to generate high aspect ratio tissue-engineered constructs. Bioresearch Open Access,
2(5), 374–384.
3. Colosi, C., et al. (2016). Microfluidic bioprinting of heterogeneous 3D tissue constructs using
low-viscosity bioink. Advanced Materials, 28(4), 677–684.
4. Cui, X., & Boland, T. (2009). Human microvasculature fabrication using thermal inkjet printing technology. Biomaterials, 30(31), 6221–6227.
5. Cui, X., et al. (2012). Thermal inkjet printing in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.
Recent Patents on Drug Delivery & Formulation, 6(2), 149–155.
6. Dahl, S. L., et al. (2007). Mechanical properties and compositions of tissue engineered and
native arteries. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 35(3), 348–355.
7. Datta, P., Ayan, B., & Ozbolat, I. T. (2017). Bioprinting for vascular and vascularized tissue
biofabrication. Acta Biomaterialia, 51, 1–20.
8. Dernowsek, J. A., et al. (2016). Tissue spheroids encaged into microscaffolds with internal
structure to increase cell viability. Procedia CIRP, 49, 174–177.
9. Domingos, M., et al. (2013). The first systematic analysis of 3D rapid prototyped poly(εcaprolactone) scaffolds manufactured through BioCell printing: The effect of pore size and
geometry on compressive mechanical behaviour and in vitro hMSC viability. Biofabrication,
5(4), 045004.
10. Du, V., et al. (2015). Magnetic engineering of stable rod-shaped stem cell aggregates:
Circumventing the pitfall of self-bending. Integrative Biology (Cambridge), 7(2), 170–177.
5 3D Printing Technology for Vascularization
of patient-specific vascular grafts. Computational analysis has improved not only
the physical parameters of printed grafts but has also helped in estimating flow
dynamics of the graft in vivo [47]. Those advancements have been indispensable to
the clinical application of the 3D printing constructs.
5.4 Conclusion
This chapter presents several 3D printing methodologies, including inkjet, extrusion, laser, and scaffold-free techniques, and their current applications in vascular
tissue fabrication. The ultimate clinical goal of 3D printing technologies is to
improve patient outcomes using 3D printed constructs. Despite the breakthroughs
and progress in 3D bioprinting and vascular tissue engineering, there are still many
technical and biological limitations that must be overcome. Further optimization
and innovation are needed in terms of the printing process, tissue regeneration, and
the biomaterials used. Multidisciplinary research will play a key role in addressing
these challenges and realizing the translation of 3D printing technology to clinical
practice.
References
1. Baudis, S., Nehl, F., Ligon, S. C., Nigisch, A., Bergmeister, H., Bernhard, D., et al. (2011).
Elastomeric degradable biomaterials by photopolymerization-based CAD-CAM for vascular
tissue engineering. Biomedical Materials, 6(5), 055003.
2. Blaeser, A., et al. (2013). Biofabrication under fluorocarbon: A novel freeform fabrication
technique to generate high aspect ratio tissue-engineered constructs. Bioresearch Open Access,
2(5), 374–384.
3. Colosi, C., et al. (2016). Microfluidic bioprinting of heterogeneous 3D tissue constructs using
low-viscosity bioink. Advanced Materials, 28(4), 677–684.
4. Cui, X., & Boland, T. (2009). Human microvasculature fabrication using thermal inkjet printing technology. Biomaterials, 30(31), 6221–6227.
5. Cui, X., et al. (2012). Thermal inkjet printing in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.
Recent Patents on Drug Delivery & Formulation, 6(2), 149–155.
6. Dahl, S. L., et al. (2007). Mechanical properties and compositions of tissue engineered and
native arteries. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 35(3), 348–355.
7. Datta, P., Ayan, B., & Ozbolat, I. T. (2017). Bioprinting for vascular and vascularized tissue
biofabrication. Acta Biomaterialia, 51, 1–20.
8. Dernowsek, J. A., et al. (2016). Tissue spheroids encaged into microscaffolds with internal
structure to increase cell viability. Procedia CIRP, 49, 174–177.
9. Domingos, M., et al. (2013). The first systematic analysis of 3D rapid prototyped poly(εcaprolactone) scaffolds manufactured through BioCell printing: The effect of pore size and
geometry on compressive mechanical behaviour and in vitro hMSC viability. Biofabrication,
5(4), 045004.
10. Du, V., et al. (2015). Magnetic engineering of stable rod-shaped stem cell aggregates:
Circumventing the pitfall of self-bending. Integrative Biology (Cambridge), 7(2), 170–177.
5 3D Printing Technology for Vascularization