Advertisement

Current Status of Development and Intellectual Properties of Biomimetic Medical Materials

  • Janarthanan Gopinathan
  • Insup NohEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 1064)

Abstract

Biomimetic medical materials are the biomaterials which mimic the important characteristic features of natural material/tissue structures or architectures and are mainly used in biomedical field for their applications in tissue regeneration, medical devices, biosensors and drug delivery. It is one of the leading research topics which have the ability to replace the existing biomaterials and medical devices and to development new biomaterials. The innovation and development in this research area are growing quickly because of the state-of-the-art techniques like nanobiotechnology, biosensors, tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, and 3D (bio)printing. These techniques can mimic the biomacromolecules, peptide sequences, morphology, chemical and physical structures more precisely than other currently available methods. The importance of hydrogels and its composites as examples among many other biomaterials are increasing vastly because of their recent advancements in its biological, chemical and physical cues which are biomimetic to native tissues. Furthermore, an enhancement in the 3D bioprinting technology where live cells are printed along with biomaterials demonstrates the capabilities of this technology to innovate novel tissue engineering products in micro- to macro-technology. The recent trends of development and intellectual properties related to biomimetic medical materials along with their perspectives and area of scope are discussed by focusing on 3D bioprinting in this chapter.

Keywords

Biomimetic Tissue engineering 3D bioprinting Hydrogels Intellectual property 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant (2015R1A2A1A10054592).

References

  1. Abidi N, Hu Y, Texas Tech University System (2016) Cotton fiber dissolution and regeneration and 3D printing of cellulose based conductive composites. U.S. Patent Application 15/355,480Google Scholar
  2. Abitbol T, Rivkin A, Cao Y, Nevo Y, Abraham E, Ben-Shalom T, Lapidot S, Shoseyov O (2016) Nanocellulose, a tiny fiber with huge applications. Curr Opin Biotechnol 39:76–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akintewe OO, Roberts EG, Rim NG, Ferguson MA, Wong JY (2017) Design approaches to myocardial and vascular tissue engineering. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 19(0):389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alas GR, Agarwal R, Collard DM, García AJ (2017) Peptide-functionalized poly [oligo (ethylene glycol) methacrylate] brushes on dopamine-coated stainless steel for controlled cell adhesion. Acta Biomater 59:108–116PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrade FK, Costa R, Domingues L, Soares R, Gama M (2010) Improving bacterial cellulose for blood vessel replacement: functionalization with a chimeric protein containing a cellulose-binding module and an adhesion peptide. Acta Biomater 6(10):4034–4041PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrade FK, Silva JP, Carvalho M, Castanheira E, Soares R, Gama M (2011) Studies on the hemocompatibility of bacterial cellulose. J Biomed Mater Res A 98((4):554–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anil M, Ayyildiz-Tamis D, Tasdemir S, Sendemir-Urkmez A, Gulce-Iz S (2016) Bioinspired materials and biocompatibility. In: Emerging research on bioinspired materials engineering. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 296–324Google Scholar
  8. Atala A, Richardson K (2016) The quest to 3D print body parts. http://www.biochemist.org/bio/03804/0024/038040024.pdf. Accessed on 10 Oct 2017
  9. Bang SM, Das D, Yun J, Noh I (2017) Evaluation of MC3T3 cells proliferation and drug release study from sodium hyaluronate-BDDGE patterned gel. Nanomaterials 7(10):328–346PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bao R, Tan B, Liang S, Zhang N, Wang W, Liu W (2017) A π-π conjugation-containing soft and conductive injectable polymer hydrogel highly efficiently rebuilds cardiac function after myocardial infarction. Biomaterials 122:63–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bertassoni LE (2017) Dentin on the nanoscale: hierarchical organization, mechanical behavior and bioinspired engineering. Dent Mater 33:637PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bertassoni LE, Cardoso JC, Manoharan V, Cristino AL, Bhise NS, Araujo WA, Zorlutuna P, Vrana NE, Ghaemmaghami AM, Dokmeci MR, Khademhosseini A (2014) Direct-write bioprinting of cell-laden methacrylated gelatin hydrogels. Biofabrication 6(2):024105PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bidarra SJ, Barrias CC, Granja PL (2014) Injectable alginate hydrogels for cell delivery in tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 10(4):1646–1662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bodhak S, Bose S, Bandyopadhyay A (2016) Surface modification and electro-thermal polarisation for bone tissue engineering. In: Electrically active materials for medical devices. World Scientific, Hackensack, pp 103–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Busetti A, Maggs CA, Gilmore BF (2017) Marine macroalgae and their associated microbiomes as a source of antimicrobial chemical diversity. Eur J Phycol 52(4):452–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cardoso VF, Lopes AC, Botelho G, Lanceros-Méndez S (2015) Poly (vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene) porous films: tailoring microstructure and physical properties by solvent casting strategies. Soft Mater 13(4):243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cha SH, Lee JJ, Koh WG (2017) Study of myoblast differentiation using multi-dimensional scaffolds consisting of nano and micropatterns. Biomater Res 21:1PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chan BQY, Low ZWK, Heng SJW, Chan SY, Owh C, Loh XJ (2016) Recent advances in shape memory soft materials for biomedical applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(16):10070–10087PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chavarria AM, Aguilar JP, Queen Mary University of London (2017) Method for manufacturing a three-dimensional biomimetic scaffold and uses thereof. U.S. Patent 9,631,172Google Scholar
  20. Chen C, Bang S, Cho Y, Lee S, Lee I, Zhang S, Noh I (2016) Research trends in biomimetic medical materials for tissue engineering: 3D bioprinting, surface modification, nano/micro-technology and clinical aspects in tissue engineering of cartilage and bone. Biomater Res 20(1):10PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chung WJ, Oh JW, Kwak K, Lee BY, Meyer J, Wang E, Hexemer A, Lee SW (2011) Biomimetic self-templating supramolecular structures. Nature 478(7369):364–368PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Corradetti B, Weiner BK, Tasciottia E (2016) Biomimetic nanostructured platforms for biologically inspired medicine. In: Bio-inspired regenerative medicine: materials, processes, and clinical applications, vol 21. Pan Stanford Publishing, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  23. Correia DM, Gonçalves R, Ribeiro C, Sencadas V, Botelho G, Ribelles JG, Lanceros-Méndez S (2014) Electrosprayed poly (vinylidene fluoride) microparticles for tissue engineering applications. RSC Adv 4(62):33013–33021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Correia DM, Ribeiro C, Sencadas V, Vikingsson L, Gasch MO, Ribelles JG, Botelho G, Lanceros-Méndez S (2016) Strategies for the development of three dimensional scaffolds from piezoelectric poly (vinylidene fluoride). Mater Des 92:674–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cui X, Boland T (2009) Human microvasculature fabrication using thermal inkjet printing. Biomaterials 30(31):6221–6227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. da Silva Bartolo PJ (ed) (2011) Innovative developments in virtual and physical prototyping: proceedings of the 5th international conference on advanced research in virtual and rapid prototyping, Leiria, Portugal, CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Da Silva RM, Mano JF, Reis RL (2007) Smart thermoresponsive coatings and surfaces for tissue engineering: switching cell-material boundaries. Trends Biotechnol 25(12):577–583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Damaraju SM, Shen Y, Elele E, Khusid B, Eshghinejad A, Li J, Jaffe M, Arinzeh TL (2017) Three-dimensional piezoelectric fibrous scaffolds selectively promote mesenchymal stem cell differentiation. Biomaterials 149:51–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Das D, Bang SM, Zhang SM, Noh I (2017a) Biomolecules release and cell responses of alginate-α-tricalcium phosphate hybrid gel. Nanomaterials 7:389.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano7110389,2017-11-13
  30. Das D, Zhang SM, Noh I (2017b) Synthesis and characterizations of alginate-α-tricalcium phosphate microparticle hybrid film with flexibility and high mechanical property as biomaterials. Biomed Mater. OnlineGoogle Scholar
  31. Dasi LP, Grande-Allen J, Kunzelman K, Kuhl E (2017) The pursuit of engineering the ideal heart valve replacement or repair: a special issue of the annals of biomedical engineering. Ann Biomed Eng 45(2):307–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Delaviz H, Faghihi A, Delshad AA, Hadi Bahadori M, Mohamadi J, Roozbehi A (2011) Repair of peripheral nerve defects using a polyvinylidene fluoride channel containing nerve growth factor and collagen gel in adult rats. Cell J 13(3):137PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Demirel MC, Cetinkaya M, Pena-Francesch A, Jung H (2015) Recent advances in nanoscale bioinspired materials. Macromol Biosci 15(3):300–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. DeVolder RJ, Seo YB, Kong HJ (2017) Proangiogenic alginate-g-pyrrole hydrogel with decoupled control of mechanical rigidity and electrically conductivity. Biomater Res 21:24PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Donnelly H, Dalby MJ, Salmeron-Sanchez M, Sweeten PE (2017) Current approaches for modulation of the nanoscale interface in the regulation of cell behaviour. Nanomed Nanotechnol Biol Med. In PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Duan B (2017) State-of-the-art review of 3D bioprinting for cardiovascular tissue engineering. Ann Biomed Eng 45(1):195–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Duan B, Hockaday LA, Kang KH, Butcher JT (2013) 3D bioprinting of heterogeneous aortic valve conduits with alginate/gelatin hydrogels. J Biomed Mater Res A 101(5):1255–1264PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Duan B, Kapetanovic E, Hockaday LA, Butcher JT (2014) Three-dimensional printed trileaflet valve conduits using biological hydrogels and human valve interstitial cells. Acta Biomater 10(5):1836–1846PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Esmond RW (2016) Bioprinting: the patent landscape, available from: https://www.pharmafocusasia.com/strategy/bioprinting. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017
  40. Favi PM, Ospina SP, Kachole M, Gao M, Atehortua L, Webster TJ (2016) Preparation and characterization of biodegradable nano hydroxyapatite–bacterial cellulose composites with well-defined honeycomb pore arrays for bone tissue engineering applications. Cellulose 23(2):1263–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Forgacs G, Colbert SH, Hubbard BA, Marga F, Christiansen D, The Curators of The University of Missouri (2014) Engineered biological nerve graft, fabrication and application thereof. U.S. Patent 8,747,880Google Scholar
  42. Forgacs G, Marga FS, Norotte C, The Curators of The University of Missouri (2017) Self-assembling multicellular bodies and methods of producing a three-dimensional biological structure using the same. U.S. Patent 9,556,415Google Scholar
  43. Frantz C, Stewart KM, Weaver VM (2010) The extracellular matrix at a glance. J Cell Sci 123(24):4195–4200PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Frueh FS, Menger MD, Lindenblatt N, Giovanoli P, Laschke MW (2017) Current and emerging vascularization strategies in skin tissue engineering. Crit Rev Biotechnol 37(5):613–625PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Fu X, Xu M, Jia C, Xie W, Wang L, Kong D, Wang H (2016) Differential regulation of skin fibroblasts for their TGF-β1-dependent wound healing activities by biomimetic nanofibers. J Mater Chem B 4(31):5246–5255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Fujii M, Yamanouchi K, Sakai Y, Baimakhanov Z, Yamaguchi I, Soyama A, Hidaka M, Takatsuki M, Kuroki T, Eguchi S (2017) In vivo construction of liver tissue by implantation of a hepatic non-parenchymal/adipose-derived stem cell sheet. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 12:e287.  https://doi.org/10.1002/term.2424 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Gandhi A, Paul A, Sen SO, Sen KK (2015) Studies on thermoresponsive polymers: phase behaviour, drug delivery and biomedical applications. Asian J Pharm Sci 10(2):99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gao L, Kupfer M, Jung J, Yang L, Zhang P, Sie Y, Tran Q, Ajeti V, Freeman B, Fast V, Campagnola P (2017) Myocardial tissue engineering with cells derived from human induced-pluripotent stem cells and a native-like, high-resolution, 3-dimensionally printed scaffold. Circ Res, CIRCRESAHA-116 120:1318.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.310277 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gladman AS, Matsumoto EA, Nuzzo RG, Mahadevan L, Lewis JA (2016) Biomimetic 4D printing. Nat Mater 15(4):413–418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Goncalves S, Rodrigues IP, Padrão J, Silva JP, Sencadas V, Lanceros-Mendez S, Girão H, Gama FM, Dourado F, Rodrigues LR (2016) Acetylated bacterial cellulose coated with urinary bladder matrix as a substrate for retinal pigment epithelium. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 139:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gopinathan J, Mano S, Elakkiya V, Pillai MM, Sahanand KS, Rai BD, Selvakumar R, Bhattacharyya A (2015) Biomolecule incorporated poly-ε-caprolactone nanofibrous scaffolds for enhanced human meniscal cell attachment and proliferation. RSC Adv 5(90):73552–73561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gopinathan J, Pillai MM, Elakkiya V, Selvakumar R, Bhattacharyya A (2016a) Carbon nanofillers incorporated electrically conducting poly ε-caprolactone nanocomposite films and their biocompatibility studies using MG-63 cell line. Poly Bull 73(4):1037–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gopinathan J, Quigley AF, Bhattacharyya A, Padhye R, Kapsa RM, Nayak R, Shanks RA, Houshyar S (2016b) Preparation, characterisation, and in vitro evaluation of electrically conducting poly (ɛ-caprolactone)-based nanocomposite scaffolds using PC12 cells. J Biomed Mater Res A 104(4):853–865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Gopinathan J, Pillai MM, Sahanand KS, Rai BD, Selvakumar R, Bhattacharyya A (2017) Synergistic effect of electrical conductivity and biomolecules on human meniscal cell attachment, growth, and proliferation in poly-ε-caprolactone nanocomposite scaffolds. Biomed Mater 12(6):065001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Gorodzha SN, Muslimov AR, Syromotina DS, Timin AS, Tcvetkov NY, Lepik KV, Petrova AV, Surmeneva MA, Gorin DA, Sukhorukov GB, Surmenev RA (2017) A comparison study between electrospun polycaprolactone and piezoelectric poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 160:48–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Green JJ, Elisseeff JH (2016) Mimicking biological functionality with polymers for biomedical applications. Nature 540(7633):386–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Halperin-Sternfeld M, Ghosh M, Adler-Abramovich L (2017) Advantages of self-assembled supramolecular polymers toward biological applications. In: Supramolecular chemistry of biomimetic systems. Springer, Singapore, pp 9–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hauser C, Loo Y, Agency for Science (2014) Novel ultrashort hydrophobic peptides that self-assemble into nanofibrous hydrogels and their uses. U.S. Patent Application 15/039,922Google Scholar
  59. Hauser C, Seow WY, Agency for Science (2017) Building stratified biomimetic tissues and organs using crosslinked ultrashort peptide hydrogel membranes. U.S. Patent 9,687,591Google Scholar
  60. He Y, Yang F, Zhao H, Gao Q, Xia B, Fu J (2016) Research on the printability of hydrogels in 3D bioprinting. Sci Rep 6:29977PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Henriksson I, Gatenholm P, Hägg DA (2017) Increased lipid accumulation and adipogenic gene expression of adipocytes in 3D bioprinted nanocellulose scaffolds. Biofabrication 9(1):015022PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Higashi N, Hirata A, Nishimura SN, Koga T (2017) Thermo-responsive polymer brushes on glass plate prepared from a new class of amino acid-derived vinyl monomers and their applications in cell-sheet engineering. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 159:39–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Hornick JF, Rajan K (2015) Chapter 16: intellectual property in 3D printing and nanotechnology. In: Zhang LG, Fisher JP, Leong K (eds) 3D Bioprinting and nanotechnology in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Academic Press, Amsterdam, pp 349–364 ISBN: 978-0-12-800547-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hornick JF, Rajan K (2016) The 3D bioprinting patent landscape takes shape as IP leaders emerge available from: https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-bioprinting-patent-landscape-takes-shape-ip-leaders-emerge-84541
  65. Hospodiuk M, Dey M, Sosnoski D, Ozbolat IT (2017) The bioink: a comprehensive review on bioprintable materials. Biotechnol Adv 35(2):217–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Hsu MN, Liao HT, Li KC, Chen HH, Yen TC, Makarevich P, Parfyonova Y, Hu YC (2017) Adipose-derived stem cell sheets functionalized by hybrid baculovirus for prolonged GDNF expression and improved nerve regeneration. Biomaterials 140:189–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Islam MM, Cėpla V, He C, Edin J, Rakickas T, Kobuch K, Ruželė Ž, Jackson WB, Rafat M, Lohmann CP, Valiokas R (2015) Functional fabrication of recombinant human collagen–phosphorylcholine hydrogels for regenerative medicine applications. Acta Biomater 12:70–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Jabbari E, Kim DH, Lee LP (eds) (2014) Handbook of biomimetics and bioinspiration: biologically-driven engineering of materials, processes, devices, and systems. World Scientific, HackensackGoogle Scholar
  69. Jaikumar D, Sajesh KM, Soumya S, Nimal TR, Chennazhi KP, Nair SV, Jayakumar R (2015) Injectable alginate-O-carboxymethyl chitosan/nano fibrin composite hydrogels for adipose tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 74:318–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Jiang W, Niu D, Liu H, Wang C, Zhao T, Yin L, Shi Y, Chen B, Ding Y, Lu B (2014) Photoresponsive soft-robotic platform: biomimetic fabrication and remote actuation. Adv Funct Mater 24(48):7598–7604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Jin Y, Liu C, Chai W, Compaan AM, Huang Y (2017) Self-supporting Nanoclay as internal scaffold material for direct printing of soft hydrogel composite structures in air. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9(20):17456–17465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Jonelle ZY, Korkmaz E, Berg MI, LeDuc PR, Ozdoganlar OB (2017) Biomimetic scaffolds with three-dimensional undulated microtopographies. Biomaterials 128:109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Jung CS, Kim BK, Lee J, Min BH, Park SH (2018) Development of printable natural cartilage matrix bioink for 3D printing of irregular tissue shape. Tissue Eng Regen Med 15(2):155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Kawamura M, Miyagawa S, Fukushima S, Saito A, Miki K, Funakoshi S, Yoshida Y, Yamanaka S, Shimizu T, Okano T, Daimon T (2017) Enhanced therapeutic effects of human iPS cell derived-cardiomyocyte by combined cell-sheets with omental flap technique in porcine ischemic cardiomyopathy model. Sci Rep 7:8824PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Kesti M, Eberhardt C, Pagliccia G, Kenkel D, Grande D, Boss A, Zenobi-Wong M (2015) Bioprinting complex cartilaginous structures with clinically compliant biomaterials. Adv Funct Mater 25(48):7406–7417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Kharaziha M, Nikkhah M, Shin SR, Annabi N, Masoumi N, Gaharwar AK, Camci-Unal G, Khademhosseini A (2013) PGS: gelatin nanofibrous scaffolds with tunable mechanical and structural properties for engineering cardiac tissues. Biomaterials 34(27):6355–6366PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Khatiwala C, Murphy K, Shepherd B, Organovo, Inc. (2011a) Multilayered vascular tubes, GB 2478801 B, https://search.wellspringsoftware.net/patent/GB2478801B, referring also published as: AU2011227282B2, CA2793205C, CN102883680B, CN105749349A, EP02547288A2, GB2489081B, HK1159682A1, mJP2016052527A
  78. Khatiwala C, Murphy K, Shepherd B, Organovo, Inc. (2011b) Multilayered vascular tubes. U.S. Patent Application 13/634,863Google Scholar
  79. Kim JE, Kim SH, Jung Y (2016) Current status of three-dimensional printing inks for soft tissue regeneration. Tissue Eng Regen Med 13(6):636–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Kobayashi J, Akiyama Y, Yamato M, Okano T (2016) November. ECM-mimicking thermoresponsive surface for manipulating hepatocyte sheets with maintenance of hepatic functions. In micro-Nanomechatronics and human science (MHS), 2016 international symposium on IEEE, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  81. Kupecz A, Roox K, Dekoninck C, Schertenleib D, Stief M, Sanna F, Orsingher M, Miralles S, Molina E, Crosse T, Gilbert M (2015) Safe harbors in Europe: an update on the research and Bolar exemptions to patent infringement. Nat Biotech 33(7):710–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Kwee BJ, Mooney DJ (2017) Biomaterials for skeletal muscle tissue engineering. Curr Opin Biotechnol 47:16–22PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Laing S, Suriano R, Lamprou DA, Smith CA, Dalby MJ, Mabbott S, Faulds K, Graham D (2016) Thermoresponsive polymer micropatterns fabricated by dip-pen nanolithography for a highly controllable substrate with potential cellular applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(37):24844–24852PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Leckart S (2013) How 3-D printing body parts will revolutionize medicine, popular science, available from: https://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-07/how-3-d-printing-body-parts-will-revolutionize-medicine. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017
  85. Lee V, Singh G, Trasatti JP, Bjornsson C, Xu X, Tran TN, Yoo SS, Dai G, Karande P (2013) Design and fabrication of human skin by three-dimensional bioprinting. Tis Eng Part C: Methods 20(6):473–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lee J, Kim KE, Bang B, Noh I, Lee C (2017) A desktop multi-material 3D bio-printing system with open-source hardware and software. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 18(4):605–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Levy D (2006) An artificial cornea is in sight, thanks to biomimetic hydrogels. Stanford report. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2006/september13/cornea-091306.html
  88. Li H, Tan YJ, Leong KF, Li L (2017a) 3D bioprinting of highly thixotropic alginate/methylcellulose hydrogel with strong interface bonding. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9(23):20086–20097PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Li R, Xu J, Wong DSH, Li J, Zhao P, Bian L (2017b) Self-assembled N-cadherin mimetic peptide hydrogels promote the chondrogenesis of mesenchymal stem cells through inhibition of canonical Wnt/β-catenin signaling. Biomaterials 145:33–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Lin N, Dufresne A (2014) Nanocellulose in biomedicine: current status and future prospect. Eur Polym J 59:302–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Liu Y, Wang S, Zhang R (2017) Composite poly (lactic acid)/chitosan nanofibrous scaffolds for cardiac tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 103:1130–1137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Llopis-Hernández V, Cantini M, González-García C, Cheng ZA, Yang J, Tsimbouri PM, García AJ, Dalby MJ, Salmerón-Sánchez M (2016) Material-driven fibronectin assembly for high-efficiency presentation of growth factors. Sci Adv 2(8):e1600188PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Long T, Zhu Z, Awad HA, Schwarz EM, Hilton MJ, Dong Y (2014) The effect of mesenchymal stem cell sheets on structural allograft healing of critical sized femoral defects in mice. Biomaterials 35(9):2752–2759PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Mandrycky C, Wang Z, Kim K, Kim DH (2016) 3D bioprinting for engineering complex tissues. Biotech Adv 34(4):422–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Marino A, Genchi GG, Mattoli V, Ciofani G (2017) Piezoelectric nanotransducers: the future of neural stimulation. Nano Today 14:9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Martins PM, Ribeiro S, Ribeiro C, Sencadas V, Gomes AC, Gama FM, Lanceros-Méndez S (2013) Effect of poling state and morphology of piezoelectric poly (vinylidene fluoride) membranes for skeletal muscle tissue engineering. RSC Adv 3(39):17938–17944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Matsumoto M, Umeda Y, Masui K, Fukushige S (eds) (2012) Design for innovative value towards a sustainable society: proceedings of ecodesign 2011: 7th international symposium on environmentally conscious design and inverse manufacturing. Springer Science & Business MediaGoogle Scholar
  98. Matsuura K, Utoh R, Nagase K, Okano T (2014) Cell sheet approach for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. J Control Release 190:228–239PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Meng F, Fu X, Ni Y, Sun J, Li Z (2017) Biomimetic polypeptides with reversible pH-dependent thermal responsive property. Polymer 118:173–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Minardi S, Sandri M, Martinez JO, Yazdi IK, Liu X, Ferrari M, Weiner BK, Tampieri A, Tasciotti E (2014) Multiscale patterning of a biomimetic scaffold integrated with composite microspheres. Small 10(19):3943–3953PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Minssen T, Mimler M (2017) Patenting bioprinting-technologies in the US and Europe–the 5th element in the 3rd dimension. Chapter 7. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2946209
  102. Mironov VA, Khesuani YD, Mitryashkin AN, Gladkaya IS, Ostrovsky AY, Novoselov SV, Private Institution Lab For Biotechnological Research 3D Bioprinting Solutions (2015) Device and methods for printing biological tissues and organs. U.S. Patent Application 15/311,242Google Scholar
  103. Mitchell AC, Briquez PS, Hubbell JA, Cochran JR (2016) Engineering growth factors for regenerative medicine applications. Acta Biomater 30:1–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Mondschein RJ, Kanitkar A, Williams CB, Verbridge SS, Long TE (2017) Polymer structure-property requirements for stereolithographic 3D printing of soft tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomaterials 140:170–188PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Morris AH, Stamer DK, Kyriakides TR (2017) The host response to naturally-derived extracellular matrix biomaterials. In: Seminars in immunology, vol 29. Academic Press, London, p 72Google Scholar
  106. Mosadegh B, Xiong G, Dunham S, Min JK (2015) Current progress in 3D printing for cardiovascular tissue engineering. Biomed Mater 10(3):034002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Mota C, Labardi M, Trombi L, Astolfi L, D'Acunto M, Puppi D, Gallone G, Chiellini F, Berrettini S, Bruschini L, Danti S (2017) Design, fabrication and characterization of composite piezoelectric ultrafine fibers for cochlear stimulation. Mater Des 122:206–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Naleway SE, Porter MM, McKittrick J, Meyers MA (2015) Structural design elements in biological materials: application to bioinspiration. Adv Mater 27(37):5455–5476PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Ngandu Mpoyi E, Cantini M, Reynolds PM, Gadegaard N, Dalby MJ, Salmerón-Sánchez M (2016) Protein adsorption as a key mediator in the nanotopographical control of cell behavior. ACS Nano 10(7):6638–6647PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Nguyen D, Hägg DA, Forsman A, Ekholm J, Nimkingratana P, Brantsing C, Kalogeropoulos T, Zaunz S, Concaro S, Brittberg M, Lindahl A (2017) Cartilage tissue engineering by the 3D bioprinting of iPS cells in a nanocellulose/alginate bioink. Sci Rep 7(1):658PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Nunes-Pereira J, Ribeiro S, Ribeiro C, Gombek CJ, Gama FM, Gomes AC, Patterson DA, Lanceros-Méndez S (2015) Poly (vinylidene fluoride) and copolymers as porous membranes for tissue engineering applications. Poly Testing 44:234–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Ozbolat IT (2016) 3D bioprinting: fundamentals, principles and applications. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  113. Park JH, Jang J, Lee JS, Cho DW (2016a) Current advances in three-dimensional tissue/organ printing. Tissue Eng Regen Med 13(6):612–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Park KD, Wang X, Lee JY, Park KM, Zhang S, Noh I (2016b) Research trends in biomimetic medical materials for tissue engineering: commentary. Biomater Res 20(1):8PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Park SH, Jung CS, Min BH (2016c) Advances in three-dimensional bioprinting for hard tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Regen Med 13(6):622–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Pashkov V, Harkusha A (2017) 3-D bioprinting law regulation perspectives. Wiadomosci lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland: 1960), 70, 480. Available from http://pli.nlu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/5.pdf. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017
  117. Patterson J, Martino MM, Hubbell JA (2010) Biomimetic materials in tissue engineering. Mater Today 13(1):14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Perea-Gil I, Uriarte JJ, Prat-Vidal C, Gálvez-Montón C, Roura S, Llucià-Valldeperas A, Soler-Botija C, Farré R, Navajas D, Bayes-Genis A (2015) In vitro comparative study of two decellularization protocols in search of an optimal myocardial scaffold for recellularization. Am J Transl Res 7(3):558PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  119. Pina S, Oliveira JM, Reis RL (2016) Biomimetic strategies to engineer mineralized human tissues. In: Handbook of bioceramics and biocomposites. Springer, Cham, pp 503–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Pirraco RP, Obokata H, Iwata T, Marques AP, Tsuneda S, Yamato M, Reis RL, Okano T (2011) Development of osteogenic cell sheets for bone tissue engineering applications. Tissue Eng Part A 17(11–12):1507–1515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Pourchet LJ, Thepot A, Albouy M, Courtial EJ, Boher A, Blum LJ, Marquette CA (2017) Human skin 3D bioprinting using scaffold-free approach. Adv Healthc Mater 6(4):1601101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Press Release (2012) Organovo announces two issued patents, first company patent and key founder patent, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1497253/000119312512297696/d379308dex992.htm. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017
  123. Ranzani T, Gerboni G, Cianchetti M, Menciassi A (2015) A bioinspired soft manipulator for minimally invasive surgery. Bioinspir Biomim 10(3):035008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Ratheesh G, Venugopal JR, Chinappan A, Ezhilarasu H, Sadiq A, Ramakrishna S (2017) 3D fabrication of polymeric scaffolds for regenerative therapy. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 3:1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Ribeiro C, Correia DM, Ribeiro S, Sencadas V, Botelho G, Lanceros-Méndez S (2015) Piezoelectric poly (vinylidene fluoride) microstructure and poling state in active tissue engineering. Eng Life Sci 15(4):351–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Rose JC, Cámara-Torres M, Rahimi K, Köhler J, Möller M, De Laporte L (2017) Nerve cells decide to orient inside an injectable hydrogel with minimal structural guidance. Nano Lett 17(6):3782PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Roshanbinfar K, Hilborn J, Varghese OP, Oommen OP (2017) Injectable and thermoresponsive pericardial matrix derived conductive scaffold for cardiac tissue engineering. RSC Adv 7(51):31980–31988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Rowley JA, Lock LT, Roosterbio, Inc. (2015) Ready-to-print cells and integrated devices. U.S. Patent Application 15/311,018Google Scholar
  129. Rutz AL, Hyland KE, Jakus AE, Burghardt WR, Shah RN (2015) A multimaterial bioink method for 3D printing tunable, cell-compatible hydrogels. Adv Mater 27(9):1607–1614PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Sahara G, Hijikata W, Tomioka K, Shinshi T (2016) Implantable power generation system utilizing muscle contractions excited by electrical stimulation. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H: J Eng Med 230(6):569–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Sala RL, Kwon MY, Kim M, Gullbrand SE, Henning EA, Mauck RL, Camargo ER, Burdick JA (2017) Thermosensitive poly (N-vinylcaprolactam) injectable hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A 23(17–18):935–945PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Saldin LT, Cramer MC, Velankar SS, White LJ, Badylak SF (2017) Extracellular matrix hydrogels from decellularized tissues: structure and function. Acta Biomater 49:1–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Saludas L, Pascual-Gil S, Prósper F, Garbayo E, Blanco-Prieto M (2017) Hydrogel based approaches for cardiac tissue engineering. Int J Pharm 523(2):454–475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Sari DP, Bang SM, Nguyen LT, Cho Y, Park KD, Lee SH, Lee IS, Zhang SM, Noh I (2016) Micro/Nano surface topography and 3D bioprinting of biomaterials in tissue engineering. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 16:8909–8922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Sawkins MJ, Mistry P, Brown BN, Shakesheff KM, Bonassar LJ, Yang J (2015) Cell and protein compatible 3D bioprinting of mechanically strong constructs for bone repair. Biofabrication 7(3):035004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Seo BB, Koh JT, Song SC (2017) Tuning physical properties and BMP-2 release rates of injectable hydrogel systems for an optimal bone regeneration effect. Biomaterials 122:91–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Skardal A, Mack D, Kapetanovic E, Atala A, Jackson JD, Yoo J, Soker S (2012) Bioprinted amniotic fluid-derived stem cells accelerate healing of large skin wounds. Stem Cells Transl Med 1(11):792–802PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Soiberman U, Kambhampati SP, Wu T, Mishra MK, Oh Y, Sharma R, Wang J, Al Towerki AE, Yiu S, Stark WJ, Kannan RM (2017) Subconjunctival injectable dendrimer-dexamethasone gel for the treatment of corneal inflammation. Biomaterials 125:38–53PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Syed-Picard FN, Du Y, Hertsenberg AJ, Palchesko R, Funderburgh ML, Feinberg AW, Funderburgh JL (2016) Scaffold-free tissue engineering of functional corneal stromal tissue. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 12:59.  https://doi.org/10.1002/term.2363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Tam RY, Smith LJ, Shoichet MS (2017) Engineering cellular microenvironments with photo-and enzymatically responsive hydrogels: toward biomimetic 3D cell culture models. Acc Chem Res 50(4):703–713PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Teichmann J, Nitschke M, Pette D, Valtink M, Gramm S, Härtel FV, Noll T, Funk RH, Engelmann K, Werner C (2015) Thermo-responsive cell culture carriers based on poly (vinyl methyl ether) – the effect of biomolecular ligands to balance cell adhesion and stimulated detachment. Sci Technol Adv Mater 16(4):045003PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Tekin H, Sanchez JG, Tsinman T, Langer R, Khademhosseini A (2011) Thermoresponsive platforms for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. AICHE J 57(12):3249–3258PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Theocharis AD, Skandalis SS, Gialeli C, Karamanos NK (2016) Extracellular matrix structure. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 97:4–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Tonda-Turo C, Gnavi S, Ruini F, Gambarotta G, Gioffredi E, Chiono V, Perroteau I, Ciardelli G (2017) Development and characterization of novel agar and gelatin injectable hydrogel as filler for peripheral nerve guidance channels. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 11(1):197–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Tran JL (2015) Patenting bioprinting Harvard journal of law and technology digest, 2015 symposium, 2, Available from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2603693. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017)
  146. Uhlig K, Wegener T, He J, Zeiser M, Bookhold J, Dewald I, Godino N, Jaeger M, Hellweg T, Fery A, Duschl C (2016) Patterned thermoresponsive microgel coatings for noninvasive processing of adherent cells. Biomacromolecules 17(3):1110–1116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Uz M, Mallapragada SK (2017) Smart materials for nerve regeneration and neural tissue engineering. In: Smart materials for tissue engineering. RSC, Cambridge, pp 382–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Varanasi VG, Ilyas A, Kramer PR, Azimaie T, The Texas A&M University System (2016) In vivo live 3D printing of regenerative bone healing scaffolds for rapid fracture healing. U.S. Patent Application 15/360,788Google Scholar
  149. Varkey M, Atala A (2015) Organ bioprinting: a closer look at ethics and policies. Wake Forest JL & Pol’y 5:275Google Scholar
  150. Vellinger JC, Boland E, Kurk MA, Milliner K, Logan NS, Inventors; Techshot, Inc., assignee (2016) Biomanufacturing system, method, and 3D bioprinting hardware in a reduced gravity environment. U.S. Patent Application 15/225,547Google Scholar
  151. Vo TN, Tatara AM, Santoro M, van den Beucken JJ, Leeuwenburgh SC, Jansen JA, Mikos AG (2017) Acellular mineral deposition within injectable, dual-gelling hydrogels for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A 105(1):110–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Wagle D, Arce P (2017) Liposome-nanotemplated agarose-gel for tissue engineering scaffold: preliminary synthesis & transport characterization. In: Proceedings of student research and creative inquiry day, 1. https://publish.tntech.edu/index.php/PSRCI/article/view/161. Accessed on 10 Oct 2017
  153. Walker JM, Bodamer E, Krebs O, Luo Y, Kleinfehn A, Becker ML, Dean D (2017) Effect of chemical and physical properties on the in vitro degradation of 3D printed high resolution poly (propylene fumarate) scaffolds. Biomacromolecules 18(4):1419–1425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Walters NJ, Gentleman E (2015) Evolving insights in cell–matrix interactions: elucidating how non-soluble properties of the extracellular niche direct stem cell fate. Acta Biomater 11:3–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Wang LS, Lee F, Lim J, Du C, Wan AC, Lee SS, Kurisawa M (2014) Enzymatic conjugation of a bioactive peptide into an injectable hyaluronic acid–tyramine hydrogel system to promote the formation of functional vasculature. Acta Biomater 10(6):2539–2550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Wang L, Wu Y, Hu T, Guo B, Ma PX (2017) Electrospun conductive nanofibrous scaffolds for engineering cardiac tissue and 3D bioactuators. Acta Biomater 59:68–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Whitmer WM, Seeber BU, Akeroyd MA (2014) The perception of apparent auditory source width in hearing-impaired adults. The J Acoust Soc Am 135(6):3548–3559PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Włodarczyk-Biegun MK, del Campo A (2017) 3D bioprinting of structural proteins. Biomaterials 134:180–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. World Intellectual Property Organization (2017) What is intellectual property? Available from: www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/. Accessed on 01 Nov 2017
  160. Wu A (2014) Single-action three-dimensional model printing methods. US Patent 8,817,332Google Scholar
  161. Wu Z, Su X, Xu Y, Kong B, Sun W, Mi S (2016) Bioprinting three-dimensional cell-laden tissue constructs with controllable degradation. Sci Rep 6:24474PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Wu Y, Wang L, Guo B, Ma PX (2017) Interwoven aligned conductive nanofiber yarn/hydrogel composite scaffolds for engineered 3D cardiac anisotropy. ACS Nano 11(6):5646–5659PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Wüst S, Müller R, Hofmann S (2015) 3D bioprinting of complex channels – effects of material, orientation, geometry, and cell embedding. J Biomed Mater Res A 103(8):2558–2570PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Xue X, Thiagarajan L, Braim S, Saunders BR, Shakesheff KM, Alexander C (2017) Upper critical solution temperature thermo-responsive polymer brushes and a mechanism for controlled cell attachment. J Mater Chem B 5:4926–4933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Yan H, Chang G, Sun T, Xu Y, Ma Z, Zhou T, Lin L (2016) Molecular communication in nanonetworks. Nano Biomed Eng 8(4):274–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Yang M, Lelkes PI, Gangolli RA, Gerstenhaber JA, Devlin SM, Temple University-Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education (2015) Biomimetic scaffold for regenerative dentistry. U.S. Patent Application 15/326,189Google Scholar
  167. Yang YJ, Holmberg AL, Olsen BD (2017) Artificially engineered protein polymers. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng 8(1):549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Yayon A, Sirkis R, Amit B, Wortzel A, Hepacore Ltd. (2017) Conjugates of carboxy polysaccharides with fibroblast growth factors and variants thereof. U.S. Patent 9,610,357Google Scholar
  169. Yoo SS (2015) 3D-printed biological organs: medical potential and patenting opportunity. Expert Opin Ther Pat 25:507–511PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Yuan X, Wei Y, Villasante A, Ng JJ, Arkonac DE, Chao PH, Vunjak-Novakovic G (2017) Stem cell delivery in tissue-specific hydrogel enabled meniscal repair in an orthotopic rat model. Biomaterials 132:59–71PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Zhai X, Ma Y, Hou C, Gao F, Zhang Y, Ruan C, Pan H, Lu WW, Liu W (2017) 3D-printed high strength bioactive supramolecular polymer/clay nanocomposite hydrogel scaffold for bone regeneration. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 3(6):1109–1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Zhang K, Fu Q, Yoo J, Chen X, Chandra P, Mo X, Song L, Atala A, Zhao W (2017a) 3D bioprinting of urethra with PCL/PLCL blend and dual autologous cells in fibrin hydrogel: an in vitro evaluation of biomimetic mechanical property and cell growth environment. Acta Biomater 50:154–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Zhang YS, Yue K, Aleman J, Mollazadeh-Moghaddam K, Bakht SM, Yang J, Jia W, Dell’Erba V, Assawes P, Shin SR, Dokmeci MR (2017b) 3D bioprinting for tissue and organ fabrication. Ann Biomed Eng 45(1):148–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Zhu W, Harris BT, Zhang LG (2016) Gelatin methacrylamide hydrogel with graphene nanoplatelets for neural cell-laden 3D bioprinting. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2016 I.E. 38th annual international conference of the IEEE, pp 4185–4188Google Scholar
  175. Zhu W, Qu X, Zhu J, Ma X, Patel S, Liu J, Wang P, Lai CS, Gou M, Xu Y, Zhang K (2017) Direct 3D bioprinting of prevascularized tissue constructs with complex microarchitecture. Biomaterials 124:106–115PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical & Biomolecular EngineeringSeoul National University of Science and Technology (Seoul Tech)SeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Convergence Institute of Biomedical Engineering & BiomaterialsSeoul National University of Science and Technology (Seoul Tech)SeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations