Advertisement

Collagen-based bioinks for hard tissue engineering applications: a comprehensive review

  • C. F. Marques
  • G. S. Diogo
  • S. Pina
  • J. M. Oliveira
  • T. H. SilvaEmail author
  • R. L. Reis
S.I.: Biofabrication and Bioinks for Tissue Engineering Review Article
  • 424 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. S.I.: Biofabrication and Bioinks for Tissue Engineering

Abstract

In the last few years, additive manufacturing (AM) has been gaining great interest in the fabrication of complex structures for soft-to-hard tissues regeneration, with tailored porosity, and boosted structural, mechanical, and biological properties. 3D printing is one of the most known AM techniques in the field of biofabrication of tissues and organs. This technique opened up opportunities over the conventional ones, with the capability of creating replicable, customized, and functional structures that can ultimately promote effectively different tissues regeneration. The uppermost component of 3D printing is the bioink, i.e. a mixture of biomaterials that can also been laden with different cell types, and bioactive molecules. Important factors of the fabrication process include printing fidelity, stability, time, shear-thinning properties, mechanical strength and elasticity, as well as cell encapsulation and cell-compatible conditions. Collagen-based materials have been recognized as a promising choice to accomplish an ideal mimetic bioink for regeneration of several tissues with high cell-activating properties. This review presents the state-of-art of the current achievements on 3D printing using collagen-based materials for hard tissue engineering, particularly on the development of scaffolds for bone and cartilage repair/regeneration. The ultimate aim is to shed light on the requirements to successfully print collagen-based inks and the most relevant properties exhibited by the so fabricated scaffolds. In this regard, the adequate bioprinting parameters are addressed, as well as the main materials properties, namely physicochemical and mechanical properties, cell compatibility and commercial availability, covering hydrogels, microcarriers and decellularized matrix components. Furthermore, the fabrication of these bioinks with and without cells used in inkjet printing, laser-assisted printing, and direct in writing technologies are also overviewed. Finally, some future perspectives of novel bioinks are given.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) through grant agreement ERC-2012-ADG 20120216-321266 (ERC Advanced Grant ComplexiTE), from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) to the BiogenInk project (M-ERA-NET2/0022/2016) and from North of Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020) to the projects FROnTHERA (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000023) and NORTE-08-5369-F SE-000044, under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), is greatly acknowledged. The authors are grateful for the FCT distinction attributed to J.M.O. (IF/01285/2015).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Lode A, Meyer M, Bruggemeier S, Paul B, Baltzer H, Schropfer M, et al. Additive manufacturing of collagen scaffolds by three-dimensional plotting of highly viscous dispersions. Biofabrication. 2016;8(1):015015.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/1/015015. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bose S, Ke D, Sahasrabudhe H, Bandyopadhyay A. Additive manufacturing of biomaterials. Prog Mater Sci. 2018;93:45–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.08.003. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang X, Jiang M, Zhou Z, Gou J, Hui D. 3D printing of polymer matrix composites: a review and prospective. Compos Part B: Eng. 2017;110:442–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.034. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nagarajan N, Dupret-Bories A, Karabulut E, Zorlutuna P, Vrana NE. Enabling personalized implant and controllable biosystem development through 3D printing. Biotechnol Adv.2018;36:521–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ozbolat IT, Moncal KK, Gudapati H. Evaluation of bioprinter technologies. Addit Manuf. 2017;13:179–200.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.10.003. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Murphy SV, Atala A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(8):773–85.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2958. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ozbolat IT, Hospodiuk M. Current advances and future perspectives in extrusion-based bioprinting. Biomaterials. 2016;76:321–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.076. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jose RR, Rodriguez MJ, Dixon TA, Omenetto F, Kaplan DL. Evolution of bioinks and additive manufacturing technologies for 3D bioprinting. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2016;2(10):1662–78.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00088. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holzl K, Lin S, Tytgat L, Van Vlierberghe S, Gu L, Ovsianikov A. Bioink properties before, during and after 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication. 2016;8(3):032002.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/3/032002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim YB, Lee H, Kim GH. Strategy to achieve highly porous/biocompatible macroscale cell blocks, using a collagen/genipin-bioink and an optimal 3D printing. Process ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8(47):32230–40.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b11669. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yeo MG, Kim GH. A cell-printing approach for obtaining hASC-laden scaffolds by using a collagen/polyphenol bioink. Biofabrication. 2017;9(2):025004.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa6997. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ouyang L, Yao R, Zhao Y, Sun W. Effect of bioink properties on printability and cell viability for 3D bioplotting of embryonic stem cells. Biofabrication. 2016;8(3):035020.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/3/035020. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bellis SL. Advantages of RGD peptides for directing cell association with biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2011;32(18):4205–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.02.029. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Depalle B, Qin Z, Shefelbine SJ, Buehler MJ. Influence of cross-link structure, density and mechanical properties in the mesoscale deformation mechanisms of collagen fibrils. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;52:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee H, Yang GH, Kim M, Lee J, Huh J, Kim G. Fabrication of micro/nanoporous collagen/dECM/silk-fibroin biocomposite scaffolds using a low temperature 3D printing process for bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2018;84:140–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.11.013. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Echave MC, Sánchez P, Pedraz JL, Orive G. Progress of gelatin-based 3D approaches for bone regeneration. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol. 2017;42:63–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2017.04.012. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Silva TH, Moreira-Silva J, Marques ALP, Domingues A, Bayon Y, Reis RL. Marine origin collagens and its potential applications. Mar Drugs. 2014;12(12):5881–901.  https://doi.org/10.3390/md12125881. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    San Antonio J, Persikov A, Stevens J, Jacenko O, Orgel J. Collagen biology meets medical device technology: current reality, future dreams. XXXIII IULTCS Congress November, 24–27th, 2015 Novo Hamburgo/Brazil.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shoulders MD, Raines RT. Collagen structure and stability. Annu Rev Biochem. 2009;78:929–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bellis SL. Advantages of RGD peptides for directing cell association with biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2011;32(18):4205–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.02.029. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee KY, Mooney DJ. Hydrogels for tissue engineering. Chem Rev. 2001;101(7):1869–80.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cr000108x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lepowsky E, Muradoglu M, Tasoglu S. Towards preserving post-printing cell viability and improving the resolution: past. Bioprinting. 2018;11:e00034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu W, Heinrich MA, Zhou Y, Akpek A, Hu N, Liu X, et al. Extrusion bioprinting of shear‐thinning gelatin methacryloyl bioinks. Adv Healthc Mater. 2017;6(12):1601451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang X, Ao Q, Tian X, Fan J, Wei Y, Hou W, et al. 3D bioprinting technologies for hard tissue and organ engineering. Materials. 2016;9(10):802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ji S, Guvendiren M. Recent advances in bioink design for 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2017;5:23.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2017.00023. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wlodarczyk-Biegun MK, Del Campo A. 3D bioprinting of structural proteins. Biomaterials. 2017;134:180–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.04.019. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chimene D, Lennox KK, Kaunas RR, Gaharwar AK. Advanced bioinks for 3D printing: a materials science perspective. Ann Biomed Eng. 2016;44(6):2090–102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-016-1638-y. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hospodiuk M, Dey M, Sosnoski D, Ozbolat IT. The bioink: a comprehensive review on bioprintable materials. Biotechnol Adv. 2017;35(2):217–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.12.006. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Duarte Campos DF, Blaeser A, Korsten A, Neuss S, Jakel J, Vogt M, et al. The stiffness and structure of three-dimensional printed hydrogels direct the differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells toward adipogenic and osteogenic lineages. Tissue Eng Part A. 2015;21(3-4):740–56.  https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEA.2014.0231. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hinton TJ, Jallerat Q, Palchesko RN, Park JH, Grodzicki MS, Shue HJ, et al. Three-dimensional printing of complex biological structures by freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels. Sci Adv. 2015;1(9):e1500758.  https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500758. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shim J-H, Jang K-M, Hahn SK, Park JY, Jung H, Oh K, et al. Three-dimensional bioprinting of multilayered constructs containing human mesenchymal stromal cells for osteochondral tissue regeneration in the rabbit knee joint. Biofabrication. 2016;8(1):014102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kolesky DB, Truby RL, Gladman AS, Busbee TA, Homan KA, Lewis JA. 3D bioprinting of vascularized, heterogeneous cell-laden tissue constructs. Adv Mater. 2014;26(19):3124–30.  https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201305506. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gopinathan J, Noh I. Recent trends in bioinks for 3D printing. Biomater. Res. 2018;22:11.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40824-018-0122-1.
  34. 34.
    Jang J, Park JY, Gao G, Cho D-W. Biomaterials-based 3D cell printing for next-generation therapeutics and diagnostics. Biomaterials. 2018;156:88–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.11.030. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yue K, Trujillo-de Santiago G, Alvarez MM, Tamayol A, Annabi N, Khademhosseini A. Synthesis, properties, and biomedical applications of gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) hydrogels. Biomaterials. 2015;73:254–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fedorovich NE, Schuurman W, Wijnberg HM, Prins HJ, van Weeren PR, Malda J, et al. Biofabrication of osteochondral tissue equivalents by printing topologically defined, cell-laden hydrogel scaffolds. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2012;18(1):33–44.  https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEC.2011.0060. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Smith CM, Stone AL, Parkhill RL, Stewart RL, Simpkins MW, Kachurin AM, et al. Three-dimensional bioassembly tool for generating viable tissue-engineered constructs. Tiss Eng. 2004;10(9-10):1566–76.  https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.2004.10.1566. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Homenick CM, Gd Silveira, Sheardown H, Adronov A. Pluronics as crosslinking agents for collagen: novel amphiphilic hydrogels. Polym Int. 2011;60(3):458–65.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.2969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    SeungHyun A, Young HoK, GeunHyung K. A three-dimensional hierarchical collagen scaffold fabricated by a combined solid freeform fabrication (SFF) and electrospinning process to enhance mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) proliferation. J Micromech Microeng. 2010;20(6):065015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rhee S, Puetzer JL, Mason BN, Reinhart-King CA, Bonassar LJ. 3D bioprinting of spatially heterogeneous collagen constructs for cartilage tissue engineering. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2016;2(10):1800–05.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00288. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Diamantides N, Wang L, Pruiksma T, Siemiatkoski J, Dugopolski C, Shortkroff S, et al. Correlating rheological properties and printability of collagen bioinks: the effects of riboflavin photocrosslinking and pH. Biofabrication. 2017;9(3):034102.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa780f. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shin K-H, Kim J-W, Koh Y-H, Kim H-E. Novel self-assembly-induced 3D plotting for macro/nano-porous collagen scaffolds comprised of nanofibrous collagen filaments. Mater Lett. 2015;143:265–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee HJ, Kim YB, Ahn SH, Lee JS, Jang CH, Yoon H, et al. A new approach for fabricating collagen/ECM‐based bioinks using preosteoblasts and human adipose stem cells. Adv Healthc Mater. 2015;4(9):1359–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Di Giuseppe M, Law N, Webb B, Macrae RA, Liew LJ, Sercombe TB, et al. Mechanical behaviour of alginate-gelatin hydrogels for 3D bioprinting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;79:150–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Klotz BJ, Gawlitta D, Rosenberg AJWP, Malda J, Melchels FPW. Gelatin-methacryloyl hydrogels: towards biofabrication-based tissue repair. Trends Biotechnol. 2016;34(5):394–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.01.002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Billiet T, Gevaert E, De Schryver T, Cornelissen M, Dubruel P. The 3D printing of gelatin methacrylamide cell-laden tissue-engineered constructs with high cell viability. Biomaterials. 2014;35(1):49–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.09.078. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zhao Y, Li Y, Mao S, Sun W, Yao R. The influence of printing parameters on cell survival rate and printability in microextrusion-based 3D cell printing technology. Biofabrication. 2015;7(4):045002  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/7/4/045002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Oliveira SM, Reis RL, Mano JF. Towards the design of 3D multiscale instructive tissue engineering constructs: current approaches and trends. Biotechnol Adv. 2015;33(6 Pt 1):842–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.05.007. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lee H, Kim Y, Kim S, Kim G. Mineralized biomimetic collagen/alginate/silica composite scaffolds fabricated by a low-temperature bio-plotting process for hard tissue regeneration: fabrication, characterisation and in vitro cellular activities. J Mater Chem B. 2014;2(35):5785–98.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4TB00931B. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lee HJ, Kim YB, Ahn SH, Lee JS, Jang CH, Yoon H, et al. A new approach for fabricating collagen/ECM-based bioinks using preosteoblasts and human adipose stem cells. Adv Healthc Mater. 2015;4(9):1359–68.  https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.201500193. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Das S, Pati F, Choi YJ, Rijal G, Shim JH, Kim SW, et al. Bioprintable, cell-laden silk fibroin-gelatin hydrogel supporting multilineage differentiation of stem cells for fabrication of three-dimensional tissue constructs. Acta Biomater. 2015;11:233–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.09.023. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kim W, Jang CH, Kim G. Optimally designed collagen/polycaprolactone biocomposites supplemented with controlled release of HA/TCP/rhBMP-2 and HA/TCP/PRP for hard tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C, Mater Biol Appl. 2017;78:763–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.04.144. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Park JY, Choi JC, Shim JH, Lee JS, Park H, Kim SW, et al. A comparative study on collagen type I and hyaluronic acid dependent cell behavior for osteochondral tissue bioprinting. Biofabrication. 2014;6(3):035004.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5082/6/3/035004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Shim JH, Jang KM, Hahn SK, Park JY, Jung H, Oh K, et al. Three-dimensional bioprinting of multilayered constructs containing human mesenchymal stromal cells for osteochondral tissue regeneration in the rabbit knee joint. Biofabrication. 2016;8(1):014102.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/1/014102. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yang X, Lu Z, Wu H, Li W, Zheng L, Zhao J. Collagen-alginate as bioink for three-dimensional (3D) cell printing based cartilage tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C, Mater Biol Appl. 2018;83:195–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.09.002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kim WJ, Yun H-S, Kim GH. An innovative cell-laden α-TCP/collagen scaffold fabricated using a two-step printing process for potential application in regenerating hard tissues. Sci Rep. 2017;7:3181.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03455-9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Du M, Chen B, Meng Q, Liu S, Zheng X, Zhang C, et al. 3D bioprinting of BMSC-laden methacrylamide gelatin scaffolds with CBD-BMP2-collagen microfibers. Biofabrication. 2015;7(4):044104.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/7/4/044104. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wenz A, Borchers K, Tovar GEM, Kluger PJ. Bone matrix production in hydroxyapatite-modified hydrogels suitable for bone bioprinting. Biofabrication. 2017;9(4):044103.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa91ec. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fahimipour F, Rasoulianboroujeni M, Dashtimoghadam E, Khoshroo K, Tahriri M, Bastami F, et al. 3D printed TCP-based scaffold incorporating VEGF-loaded PLGA microspheres for craniofacial tissue engineering. Dent Mater. 2017;33(11):1205–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.06.016. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lee J, Yeo M, Kim W, Koo Y, Kim GH. Development of a tannic acid cross-linking process for obtaining 3D porous cell-laden collagen structure. Int J Biol Macromol. 2018;110:497–503.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.10.105. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Giuseppe MD, Law N, Webb B, AM R, Liew LJ, Sercombe TB, et al. Mechanical behaviour of alginate-gelatin hydrogels for 3D bioprinting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;79:150–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.12.018. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wu Z, Su X, Xu Y, Kong B, Sun W, Mi S. Bioprinting three-dimensional cell-laden tissue constructs with controllable degradation. Sci Rep. 2016;6:24474.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep24474. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Duarte Campos DF, Blaeser A, Buellesbach K, Sen KS, Xun W, Tillmann W, et al. Bioprinting organotypic hydrogels with improved mesenchymal stem cell remodeling and mineralization properties for bone tissue engineering. Adv Healthc Mater. 2016;5(11):1336–45.  https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.201501033. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lin KF, He S, Song Y, Wang CM, Gao Y, Li JQ, et al. Low-temperature additive manufacturing of biomimic three-dimensional hydroxyapatite/collagen scaffolds for bone. Regen ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8(11):6905–16.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b00815. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.3B’s Research Group, I3Bs – Research Institute on Biomaterials, Biodegradables and BiomimeticsUniversity of Minho, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineGuimarãesPortugal
  2. 2.ICVS/3B’s – PT Government Associate LaboratoryBraga/GuimarãesPortugal
  3. 3.The Discoveries Centre for Regenerative and Precision MedicineHeadquarters at University of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal

Personalised recommendations