Three-dimensional printing of alginate-gelatin-agar scaffolds using free-form motor assisted microsyringe extrusion system

ORIGINAL PAPER
  • 131 Downloads

Abstract

In current study, three-dimensional scaffolds of alginate-gelatin-agar were fabricated using free-form motor assisted microsyringe (MAM) extrusion system. Briefly, a hydrogel solution comprised of 18 wt% sodium alginate, 4 wt% gelatin, and 12 wt% agar was prepared by dissolving all components in sterile deionized water. Cubic scaffold with dimensions 9 × 9 × 9 mm3 were printed in a layer-by-layer fashion and sintered. Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy confirmed the chemical structure of scaffold. Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) analysis showed the fabrication of highly porous scaffolds with patterned structure and uniformly distributed holes at the surface. The dynamic contact angle measurement of alginate-gelatin-agar scaffold demonstrated its hydrophilic nature. The maximum tensile strength at breaking point, Young’s modulus, and elongation strain of scaffold were found to be 31.21 MPa, 0.83 GPa, and 2.51%, respectively. The scaffold supported the adhesion and growth of Hela cells. The interaction of scaffold with Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae as determined by the cell viability analysis through Alamar Blue assay demonstrated improved growth of microbial cells. This study can provide new dimension to the current bioprinting technology to develop patterned structure and microbes based micro/nano robots and devices.

Keywords

Bioprinting Scaffolds Microbes Biocompatibility Cell viability Micro/nano robots 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (21574050, 31270150, 51603079), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2016 M602291), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, Open Research Fund of State Key Laboratory of Polymer Physics and Chemistry, Changchun Institute of Applied Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

References

  1. 1.
    Shi Z, Gao X, Ullah MW et al (2016) Electroconductive natural polymer-based hydrogels. Biomaterials 111:40–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.09.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peng W, Derya U, Ozbolat IT (2016) Bioprinting towards physiologically-relevant tissue models for pharmaceutics. Trends Biotechnol 34:722–732.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.05.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aljohani W, Ullah MW, Zhang X, Yang G (2017) Bioprinting and its applications in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Int J Biol Macromol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.08.171
  4. 4.
    Ozbolat IT, Peng W, Ozbolat V (2016) Application areas of 3D bioprinting. Drug Discov Today 21:1257–1271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2016.04.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ozbolat IT (2015) Bioprinting scale-up tissue and organ constructs for transplantation. Trends Biotechnol 33:395–400.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gu Q, Hao J, Lu YJ et al (2015) Three-dimensional bio-printing. Sci China Life Sci 58:411–419.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11427-015-4850-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ozbolat IT, Yu Y (2013) Bioprinting toward organ fabrication: challenges and future trends. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 60:691–699.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2013.2243912 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Markstedt K, Mantas A, Tournier I et al (2015) 3D bioprinting human chondrocytes with nanocellulose-alginate bioink for cartilage tissue engineering applications. Biomacromolecules 16:1489–1496.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.5b00188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Echave MC, Sánchez P, Pedraz JL, Orive G (2017) Progress of gelatin-based 3D approaches for bone regeneration. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2017.04.012
  10. 10.
    Tabriz AG, Hermida MA, Leslie NR, Shu W (2015) Three-dimensional bioprinting of complex cell laden alginate hydrogel structures. Biofabrication 7:45012.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/7/4/045012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li B, Wang L, Xu F et al (2015) Hydrosoluble, UV-crosslinkable and injectable chitosan for patterned cell-laden microgel and rapid transdermal curing hydrogel in vivo. Acta Biomater 22:59–69.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2015.04.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gregory DA, Zhang Y, Smith PJ et al (2016) Reactive inkjet printing of biocompatible enzyme powered silk micro-rockets. Small 12:4048–4055.  https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201600921 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pescosolido L, Schuurman W, Malda J et al (2011) Hyaluronic acid and dextran-based semi-IPN hydrogels as biomaterials for bioprinting. Biomacromolecules 12:1831–1838.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm200178w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lam CXF, Mo XM, Teoh SH, Hutmacher DW (2002) Scaffold development using 3D printing with a starch-based polymer. Mater Sci Eng C 20:49–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-4931(02)00012-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cui X, Breitenkamp K, Finn MG et al (2012) Direct human cartilage repair using three-dimensional bioprinting technology. Tissue Eng Part A 18:1304–1312.  https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tea.2011.0543 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wei C, Dong J (2013) Direct fabrication of high-resolution three-dimensional polymeric scaffolds using electrohydrodynamic hot jet plotting. J Micromech Microeng 23:25017.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/23/2/025017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barron JA, Wu P, Ladouceur HD, Ringeisen BR (2004) Biological laser printing: a novel technique for creating heterogeneous 3-dimensional cell patterns. Biomed Microdevices 6:139–147.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BMMD.0000031751.67267.9f CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hung KC, Tseng CS, Dai LG, hui HS (2016) Water-based polyurethane 3D printed scaffolds with controlled release function for customized cartilage tissue engineering. Biomaterials 83:156–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ullah MW, Shi Z, Shi X et al (2017) Microbes as structural templates in biofabrication: study of surface chemistry and applications. ACS Sustain Chem Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02765
  20. 20.
    Shi Z, Shi X, Ullah MW, Li X, Revin RV, Yang G (2017) Fabrication of nanocomposites and hybrid materials using microbial biotemplates. Adv compos hybrid mater :1Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carrow JK, Kerativitayanan P, Jaiswal MK et al (2015) Polymers for bioprinting. In: Essentials 3D biofabrication transl. pp 229–248Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ahn S, Lee H, Bonassar LJ, Kim G (2012) Cells (MC3T3-E1)-laden alginate scaffolds fabricated by a modified solid-freeform fabrication process supplemented with an aerosol spraying. Biomacromolecules 13:2997–3003.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm3011352 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ullah MW, Khattak WA, Ul-Islam M et al (2014) Bio-ethanol production through simultaneous saccharification and fermentation using an encapsulated reconstituted cell-free enzyme system. Biochem Eng J 91:110–119.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2014.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ullah MW, Khattak WA, Ul-Islam M et al (2015) Encapsulated yeast cell-free system: a strategy for cost-effective and sustainable production of bio-ethanol in consecutive batches. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 20:561–575.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12257-014-0855-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zehnder T, Sarker B, Boccaccini AR, Detsch R (2015) Evaluation of an alginate-gelatine crosslinked hydrogel for bioplotting. Biofabrication 7:25001.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/7/2/025001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    JHY C, Naficy S, Yue Z et al (2013) Bio-ink properties and printability for extrusion printing living cells. Biomater Sci 1:763.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3bm00012e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hill E, Boontheekul T, Mooney DJ (2006) Designing scaffolds to enhance transplanted myoblast survival and migration. Tissue Eng 12:1295–1304.  https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.2006.12.ft-64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu Q, Zhang X, Wu B, Huang W (2012) Effects of microwave sintering on the properties of porous hydroxyapatite scaffolds. Ceram Int :1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2012.08.091
  29. 29.
    Kiprono SJ, Ullah MW, Yang G (2017) Encapsulation of E. coli in biomimetic and Fe3O4-doped hydrogel: structural and viability analyses. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-017-8625-6
  30. 30.
    Aljohani W, Li W, Ullah MW et al (2017) Application of sodium alginate hydrogel. IOSR J Biotechnol. Biochemist 3:19–31.  https://doi.org/10.9790/264X-03031931 Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hollister SJ (2005) Porous scaffold design for tissue engineering. Nat Mater 4:518–524.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat1421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ul-Islam M, Khan T, Park JK (2012) Water holding and release properties of bacterial cellulose obtained by in situ and ex situ modification. Carbohydr Polym 88:596–603.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.01.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    El-Hefian EA, Nasef MM, Hamid A (2012) Preparation and characterization of chitosan/agar blended films: part 1. Chemical structure and morphology. E-Journal Chem 9:510–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Luo Y, Lode A, Akkineni AR, Gelinsky M (2015) Concentrated gelatin/alginate composites for fabrication of predesigned scaffolds with a favorable cell response by 3D plotting. RSC Adv 5:43480–43488.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA04308E CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Khan S, Ul-Islam M, Ikram M et al (2016) Three-dimensionally microporous and highly biocompatible bacterial cellulose-gelatin composite scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. RSC Adv.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RA18847H
  36. 36.
    Di Z, Shi Z, Ullah MW et al (2017) A transparent wound dressing based on bacterial cellulose whisker and poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate). Int J Biol Macromol 1:638–644.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.07.075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ullah MW, Ul-Islam M, Khan S et al (2016) Structural and physico-mechanical characterization of bio-cellulose produced by a cell-free system. Carbohydr Polym.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.10.010
  38. 38.
    Ul-Islam M, Khattak WA, Ullah MW et al (2014) Synthesis of regenerated bacterial cellulose-zinc oxide nanocomposite films for biomedical applications. Cellulose 21:433–447.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0109-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shi X, Shi Z, Wang D et al (2016) Microbial cells with a Fe3O4 doped hydrogel extracellular matrix: manipulation of living cells by magnetic stimulus. Macromol Biosci 16:1506–1514.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.201600143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    O’Brien J, Wilson I, Orton T, Pognan F (2000) Investigation of the Alamar blue (resazurin) fluorescent dye for the assessment of mammalian cell cytotoxicity. Eur J Biochem 267:5421–5426.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01606.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Waeljumah Aljohani
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Muhammad Wajid Ullah
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wenchao Li
    • 3
  • Lei Shi
    • 3
  • Xianglin Zhang
    • 3
  • Guang Yang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.National Engineering Research Center for Nano-MedicineHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.School of Materials Science and EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations