Biomedical Microdevices

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 617–627 | Cite as

Rapid prototyping of multi-scale biomedical microdevices by combining additive manufacturing technologies

  • Stefan Hengsbach
  • Andrés Díaz LantadaEmail author


The possibility of designing and manufacturing biomedical microdevices with multiple length-scale geometries can help to promote special interactions both with their environment and with surrounding biological systems. These interactions aim to enhance biocompatibility and overall performance by using biomimetic approaches. In this paper, we present a design and manufacturing procedure for obtaining multi-scale biomedical microsystems based on the combination of two additive manufacturing processes: a conventional laser writer to manufacture the overall device structure, and a direct-laser writer based on two-photon polymerization to yield finer details. The process excels for its versatility, accuracy and manufacturing speed and allows for the manufacture of microsystems and implants with overall sizes up to several millimeters and with details down to sub-micrometric structures. As an application example we have focused on manufacturing a biomedical microsystem to analyze the impact of microtextured surfaces on cell motility. This process yielded a relevant increase in precision and manufacturing speed when compared with more conventional rapid prototyping procedures.


Fractals Surface topography Material texture Materials design Computer-aided design Additive manufacturing Direct laser writing 



This work was carried out with the support of the European Community. We appreciate the support of the European Research Infrastructure EUMINAfab (funded under the FP7 specific programme Capacities, Grant Agreement Number 226460) and its partner, the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. We are also grateful to Dr. Dieter Maas and to Dr. Thomas Schaller for their kind help and for their support of the EUMINAfab 1140 proposal. We acknowledge reviewers for their positive opinions, encouraging commments and proposals for improvement, which have helped to enhance paper quality, readability, content and final result.


  1. E.S. Place, N. Evans, M. Stevens, Complexity in biomaterials for tissue engineering. Nat. Mater. 8, 457–469 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Ponche, M. Bigerelle, K. Anselme, Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on ell response to bone implant materials. Part 1: Physico-chemical effects. Proc. IME. J. Eng. Med. 224(12), 1471–1486 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. K. Anselme, A. Ponche, M. Bigerelle, Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on ell response to bone implant materials. Part 2: Biological aspects. Proc. IME. J. Eng. Med. 224(12), 1487–1507 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. I.S. Reljin, B.D. Reljin, Fractal geometry and multifractals in analyzing and processing medical data and images. Arch. Oncol. 10(4), 283–293 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. H. Hosseinkhani, M. Hosseinkhani, S. Hattori, R. Matsuoka, N. Kawaguchi, Micro and nano-scale in vitro 3D culture system for cardiac stem cells. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 94(1), 1–8 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. H. Hosseinkhani, M. Hosseinkhani, F. Tian, H. Kobayashi, Y. Tabata, Bone regeneration on a collagen sponge self-assembled peptide-amphiphile nanofiber hybrid scaffold. Tissue Eng. 13(1), 11–19 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borchers K, Bierwisch C, Cousteau J, Engelhard S, Graf C, Jaeger R, Klechowitz N, Kluger P, Krueger H, Meyer W, Novosel E, Refle O, Schuh C, Seiler N, Tovar G, Wegener M, Ziegler T. New cytocompatible materials for additive manufacturing of bio-inspired blood vessels systems. International Conference on Biofabrication 2012.Google Scholar
  8. J. Archard, Surface topography and tribology. Tribology 7(5), 213–220 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. B. Bushan, J. Israelachvili, U. Landman, Nanotribology: friction, wear and lubrication at the atomic scale. Nature 374, 607–616 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. W. Barthlott, C. Neinhuis, Purity of the sacred lotus, or escape from contamination in biological surfaces. Planta 202, 1–8 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. A. Buxboim, D.E. Discher, Stem cells feel the difference. Nat. Methods 7(9), 695–697 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. M. Berginski, J. Hüpkes, M. Schulte, G. Schöpe, H. Stiebig, B. Rech, The effect of front ZnO:Al surface texture and optical transparencyon efficient light trapping in silicon thin-film solar cells. J. Appl. Phys. 101, 074903 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. V. Briones, J.M. Aguilera, C. Brown, The effect of surface topography on color and gloss of chocolate samples. J. Food Eng. 77(4), 776–783 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. M.J. Madou, Fundamentals of microfabrication: The Science of miniaturization, 2nd edn. (CRC Press, New York, 2002)Google Scholar
  15. Chandra P, Lai K, Sunj HJ, Murthy NS, Kohn J. UV laser-ablated surface textures as potential regulator of cellular response. Biointerphases, 5 (2), 53–59, (2010)Google Scholar
  16. C.R. Martin, I.A. Aksay, Microchannel molding: A soft lithography-inspired approachto micrometer-scale patterning. J. Mater. Res. 20(8), 1995–2003 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. D.P. Pulsifier, A. Lakhtakia, Background and survey of bioreplication techniques. Bioinspir. Biomim 6(3), 031001 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. W. Kwasny, Predicting properties of PVD and CVD coatings based on fractal quantitiesdescribing their surface. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng 37(2), 125–192 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. S.S. Jedlicka, J.L. McKenzie, S.L. Leavesley, K.M. Little, T.J. Webster, J.P. Robinson, D.E. Nivens, J.L. Rickus, Sol–gel derived materials as substrates for neuronal differentiation: effects of surface features and protein conformation. J. Mater. Chem. 16(31), 3221–3230 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Y. Rahmawan, L. Xu, S. Yang, Self-assembly of nanostructures towards transparent, superhydrophobic surfaces. J. Mater. Chem. A 1(9), 2955–2969 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Gad-el-Hak, The MEMS Handbook (CRC Press, New York, 2003)Google Scholar
  22. V.M. Naik, R. Mukherjee, A. Majumder, A. Sharma, Super functional materials: Creation and controlof wettability, adhesion and optical effectsby meso-texturing of surfaces. Curr. Trends. Sci. (129–148) (2009). Platinum Jubilee SpecialGoogle Scholar
  23. H. Fan, Y. Lu, A. Stump, S.T. Reed, T. Baer, R. Schunk, V. Perez-Luna, G.P. López, J. Brinker, Nature 405, 56–60 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature (W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1982a)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Falconer K. Fractal Geometry: Mathematical Foundations and Applications. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2003.Google Scholar
  26. T. Bückmann, N. Stenger, M. Kadic, J. Kaschke, A. Frölich, T. Kennerknecht, C. Eberl, M. Thiel, M. Wegener, Tailored 3D mechanical metamaterials made by dip-in direct-laser-writing optical lithography. Adv. Mater. 24, 2710–2714 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. M. Röhrig, M. Thiel, M. Worgull, H. Hölscher, Hierarchical structures: 3D direct laser writing of nano-microstructured hierarchical gecko-mimicking surface. Small 8(19), 3009–3015 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Díaz Lantada A. Handbook on advanced design and manufacturing technologies for biomedical devices. Springer, 2013Google Scholar
  29. A. Díaz Lantada, J.L. Endrino, A.A. Mosquera, P. Lafont, Design and rapid prototyping of DLC coated fractal surfaces for tissue engineering applications. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 252(1), 012003 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature (W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1982b)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Falconer K. Fractal Geometry: Mathematical Foundations and Applications. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2003.Google Scholar
  32. A. Díaz Lantada, J. Endrino, V. Sánchez-Vaquero, A.A. Mosquera, P. Lafont Morgado, J.P. García Ruíz, Tissue engineering using novel DLC-coated rapid prototyped scaffolds. Plasma. Processes. Polym. 9(1), 98–107 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. H. Lipson, Frontiers in additive manufacturing, the shape of things to come. The Bridge 42(1), 5–12 (2012)Google Scholar
  34. White R. SU-8 Photoresist processing: Standard operating procedure. (Online), January, 19, 2012.Google Scholar
  35. A. Ostendorf, B.N. Chichkov, Two-photon polymerization: A new approach to micromachining. Photonics. Spectr. (October) (2006)Google Scholar
  36. M. Hermatsweiler, Laserlithografie als Innovationstreiber für Schlüsseltechnologien. Laser. Technik. J. (September) (2013)Google Scholar
  37. J.J. Norman, S.O. Choi, N.T. Tong, A.R. Aiyar, S.R. Patel, M.R. Prausnitz, M.G. Allen, Hollow microneedles for intradermal injection fabricated by sacrificial micromolding and selective electrodeposition. Biomed. Microdevices 15(2), 203–210 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. D. Simon, T. Ware, R. Marcotte, B.R. Lund, D.W. Smith, M. Di Prima, R.L. Rennaker, W. Voit, A comparison of polymer substrates for photolithographic processing of flexible bioelectronics. Biomed. Microdevices 15(6), 925–939 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. F. Klein, T. Striebel, Z. Jiang, C.M. Franz, G. Von Freymann, M. Bastmeyer, Elastic fully three-dimensional microstructure scaffolds for cell force measurements. Adv. Mater. 22, 868–871 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. A. Díaz Lantada, B. Pareja Sánchez, C. Gómez Murillo, J. Urbieta Sotillo, Fractals in tissue engineering: Towards biomimetic cell-culture matrices, microsystems and microstructured implants. Expert. Rev. Med. Devices. 10(5), 629–648 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Huang TQ, Qu X, Liu J, Chen S. 3D printing of biomimetic microstructures for cancer cell migration. Biomedical Microdevices, DOI  10.1007/s10544-013-9812-6, (Online), October, 29, 2013.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Microstructure Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)Eggenstein-LeopoldshafenGermany
  2. 2.Product Development Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing DepartmentUniversidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations