Journal of Bionic Engineering

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 435–442 | Cite as

Fabrication of 3D Printed PCL/PEG Polyblend Scaffold Using Rapid Prototyping System for Bone Tissue Engineering Application

Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a novel process used to manufacture bone tissue engineered scaffolds. This process allows for easy control of the architecture at the micro structure. However, the scaffold properties are typically limited in terms of cellular activity at the scaffold surface due to the printed materials properties. In this study, we developed a polycaprolactone (PCL) blended with polyethylene glycol (PEG) 3D printed scaffold using a rapid prototyping system. The manufactured scaffolds were then washed out to form small pores on the surface in order to improve the scaffolds hydrophilicity. We analyzed the resultant material by using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), water absorption, water contact angle, in vitro WST-1, and the Bradford assay. Additionally, cells incubated on the fabricated scaffolds were visualized by Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM). The developed scaffolds exhibited small pores on the strand surface which served to increase hydrophilicity as well as improve cellular proliferation and increase total protein content. Our findings suggest that the presence of small pores on the scaffolds can be used as an effective tool for improving implant cellular interaction. This research indicates that these modified scaffolds can be considered useful for bone tissue engineering applications to improve human health.

Keywords

polycaprolactone polyethylene glycol polyblend 3D printing porosity bone tissue engineering 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a grant from the Korean Health Technology R & D Project (HI13C1527), Ministry of Health & Welfare and by the Industrial Strategic technology development program (10053020), Ministry of Trade, industry and Energy, Republic of Korea.

References

  1. [1]
    Stevens M M. Biomaterials for bone tissue engineering. Materials Today, 2008, 11, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Benders K E, van Weeren P R, Badylak S F, Saris D B, Dhert W J, Malda J. Extracellular matrix scaffolds for cartilage and bone regeneration. Trends in Biotechnology, 2013, 31, 169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Fernandez-Yague M A, Abbah S A, McNamara L, Zeugolis D I, Pandit A, Biggs M J. Biomimetic approaches in bone tissue engineering: Integrating biological and physicomechanical strategies. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2015, 84, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Agarwal R, García A J. Biomaterial strategies for engineering implants for enhanced osseointegration and bone repair. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2015, 94, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Mathieu L M, Mueller T L, Bourban P E, Pioletti D P, Müller R, Månson J A E. Architecture and properties of anisotropic polymer composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2006, 27, 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Tang D, Tare R S, Yang L Y, Williams D F, Ou K L, Oreffo R O. Biofabrication of bone tissue: Approaches, challenges and translation for bone regeneration. Biomaterials, 2016, 83, 363–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Moroni L, De Wijn J, Van Blitterswijk C. 3D fiber-deposited scaffolds for tissue engineering: Influence of pores geometry and architecture on dynamic mechanical properties. Biomaterials, 2006, 27, 974–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Moroni L, Schotel R, Hamann D, de Wijn J R, van Blitterswijk C A. 3D Fiber-deposited electrospun integrated scaffolds enhance cartilage tissue formation. Advanced Functional Materials, 2008, 18, 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Murphy S V, Atala A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Nature Biotechnology, 2014, 32, 773–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Yeong W Y, Chua C K, Leong K F, Chandrasekaran M. Rapid prototyping in tissue engineering: Challenges and potential. Trends in Biotechnology, 2004, 22, 643–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Derby B. Printing and prototyping of tissues and scaffolds. Science, 2012, 338, 921–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Bose S, Roy M, Bandyopadhyay A. Recent advances in bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Trends in Biotechnology, 2012, 30, 546–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Woodruff M A, Hutmacher D W. The return of a forgotten polymer — Polycaprolactone in the 21st century. Progress in Polymer Science, 2010, 35, 1217–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kweon H, Yoo M K, Park I K, Kim T H, Lee H C, Lee H S, Oh J S, Akaike T, Cho C S. A novel degradable polycaprolactone networks for tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2003, 24, 801–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Dash T K, Konkimalla V B. Poly-?-caprolactone based formulations for drug delivery and tissue engineering: A review. Journal of Controlled Release, 2012, 158, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Tian H, Tang Z, Zhuang X, Chen X, Jing X. Biodegradable synthetic polymers: Preparation, functionalization and biomedical application. Progress in Polymer Science, 2012, 37, 237–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Chen F M, Liu X. Advancing biomaterials of human origin for tissue engineering. Progress in Polymer Science, 2016, 53, 86–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Reddy M M, Vivekanandhan S, Misra M, Bhatia S K, Mohanty A K. Biobased plastics and bionanocomposites: Current status and future opportunities. Progress in Polymer Science, 2013, 38, 1653–1689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Labet M, Thielemans W. Synthesis of polycaprolactone: A review. Chemical Society Reviews, 2009, 38, 3484–3504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Chen J, Spear S K, Huddleston J G, Rogers R D. Polyethylene glycol and solutions of polyethylene glycol as green reaction media. Green Chemistry, 2005, 7, 64–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Baird J A, Olayo-Valles R, Rinaldi C, Taylor L S. Effect of molecular weight, temperature, and additives on the moisture sorption properties of polyethylene glycol. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2010, 99, 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Lee S J, Lee D, Yoon T R, Kim H K, Jo H H, Park J S, Lee J H, Kim W D, Kwon I K, Park S A. Surface modification of 3D-printed porous scaffolds via mussel-inspired polydopamine and effective immobilization of rhBMP-2 to promote osteogenic differentiation for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomaterialia, 2016, 40, 182–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Lee S J, Jo H H, Kwon S K, Lee J H, Kim W D, Lee J H, Park S A, Kwon I K. A novel mussel-inspired 3D printedscaffolds immobilized with bone forming peptide-1 for bone tissue engineering applications: Preparation, characterization and evaluation of its properties. Macromolecular Research, 2016, 24, 305–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Lee S J, Heo D N, Park J S, Kwon S K, Lee J H, Lee J H, Kim W D, Kwon I K, Park S A. Characterization and preparation of bio-tubular scaffolds for fabricating artificial vascular grafts by combining electrospinning and a 3D printing system. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 2015, 17, 2996–2999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Jo H H, Lee S J, Park J S, Lee J H, Kim W D, Kwon S K, Lee J H, Lim J Y, Park S A. Characterization and preparation of three-dimensional-printed biocompatible scaffolds with highly porous strands. Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, 2016, 16, 11943–11946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Heo E Y, Ko N R, Bae M S, Lee S J, Choi B-J, Kim J H, Kim H K, Park S A, Kwon I K. Novel 3D printed alginate–BFP1 hybrid scaffolds for enhanced bone regeneration. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2017, 45, 61–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Park J, Lee S J, Jo H H, Lee J H, Kim W D, Lee J Y, Su A. Fabrication and characterization of 3D-printed bone-like β-tricalcium phosphate/polycaprolactone scaffolds for dental tissue engineering. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2017, 46, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Park J, Lee S J, Chung S, Lee J H, Kim W D, Lee J Y, Park S A. Cell-laden 3D bioprinting hydrogel matrix depending on different compositions for soft tissue engineering: Characterization and evaluation. Materials Science and Engineering: C, 2017, 71, 678–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Park S A, Lee S J, Lim K S, Bae I H, Lee J H, Kim W D, Jeong M H, Park J K. In vivo evaluation and characterization of a bio-absorbable drug-coated stent fabricated using a 3D-printing system. Materials Letters, 2015, 141, 355–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Park S A, Lee S H, Kim W D. Fabrication of porous polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite (PCL/HA) blend scaffolds using a 3D plotting system for bone tissue engineering. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 2011, 34, 505–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Depan D, Pesacreta T, Misra R. The synergistic effect of a hybrid grapheme oxide–chitosan system and biomimetic mineralization on osteoblast functions. Biomaterials Science, 2014, 2, 264–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials, 2005, 26, 5474–5491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Oh S H, Kim J H, Kim J M, Lee J H. Asymmetrically porous PLGA/Pluronic F127 membrane for effective guided bone regeneration. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, 2006, 17, 1375–1387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    Murphy C M, Haugh M G, O'Brien F J. The effect of mean pore size on cell attachment, proliferation and migration in collagen–glycosaminoglycan scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2010, 31, 461–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    Melchels F P, Barradas A M, Van Blitterswijk C A, De Boer J, Feijen J, Grijpma D W. Effects of the architecture of tissue engineering scaffolds on cell seeding and culturing. Acta Biomaterialia, 2010, 6, 4208–4217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    Kim S E, Song S H, Yun Y P, Choi B-J, Kwon I K, Bae M S, Moon H J, Kwon Y D. The effect of immobilization of heparin and bone morphogenic protein-2 (BMP-2) to titanium surfaces on inflammation and osteoblast function. Biomaterials, 2011, 32, 366–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    Hofmann S, Hagenmüller H, Koch A M, Müller R, Vunjak- Novakovic G, Kaplan D L, Merkle H P, Meinel L. Control of in vitro tissue-engineered bone-like structures using human mesenchymal stem cells and porous silk scaffolds. Biomaterials, 2007, 28, 1152–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Zeltinger J, Sherwood J K, Graham D A, Müeller R, Griffith L G. Effect of pore size and void fraction on cellular adhesion, proliferation, and matrix deposition. Tissue Engineering, 2001, 7, 557–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    Lee S J, Heo D N, Lee D, Heo M, Rim H, Zhang L G, Park S A, Do S H, Moon J H, Kwon I K. One-step fabrication of AgNPs embedded hybrid dual nanofibrous oral wound dressings. Journal of Biomedical Nanotechnology, 2016, 12, 2041–2050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    Lee S J, Heo M, Lee D, Heo D N, Lim H-N, Kwon I K. Fabrication and design of bioactive agent coated, highly- aligned electrospun matrices for nerve tissue engineering: Preparation, characterization and application. Applied Surface Science, 2017, 424, 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    Lee S J, Bae M S, Lee D W, Heo D N, Lee D, Heo M, Hong S J, Kim J, Kim W D, Park S A. The use of heparin chemistry to improve dental osteogenesis associated with implants. Carbohydrate Polymers, 2017, 157, 1750–1758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Jilin University 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Nature-Inspired Nanoconvergence SystemsKorea Institute of Machinery and MaterialsDaejeonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Dental Materials, School of DentistryKyung Hee UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations