• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Agricultural Machinery Conference
• /
• 2017.04a
• /
• pp.107-107
• /
• 2017

3D bioprinting is a technology to produce complex tissue constructs through printing living cells with hydrogel in a layer-by-layer process. To produce more stable 3D cell-laden structures, various materials have been developed such as alginate, fibrin and gelatin. However, most of these hydrogels are chemically bound using crosslinkers which can cause some problems in cytotoxicity and cell viability. On the other hand, thermosensitive hydrogels are physically cross-linked by non-covalent interaction without crosslinker, facilitating stable cytotoxicity and cell viability. The examples of currently reported thermosensitive hydrogels are poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(propylene glycol)/poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PPG-PEG) and poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) (PEG/PLGA). Chitosan, which have been widely used in tissue engineering due to its biocompatibility and osteoconductivity, can be used as thermosensitive hydrogels. However, despite the many advantages, chitosan hydrogel has not yet been used as a bioink. The purpose of this study was to develop a bioink by chitosan hydrogel for 3D bioprinting and to evaluate the suitability and potential ability of the developed chitosan hydrogel as a bioink. To prepare the chitosan hydrogel solution, ${\beta}-glycerolphosphate$ solution was added to the chitosan solution at the final pH ranged from 6.9 to 7.1. Gelation time decreased exponentially with increasing temperature. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image showed that chitosan hydrogel had irregular porous structure. From the water soluble tetrazolium salt (WST) and live and dead assay data, it was proven that there was no significant cytotoxicity and that cells were well dispersed. The chitosan hydrogel was well printed under temperature-controlled condition, and cells were well laden inside gel. The cytotoxicity of laden cells was evaluated by live and dead assay. In conclusion, chitosan bioink can be a candidate for 3D bioprinting.

• Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.238-247
• /
• 2022

Since the skin covers most surfaces of the body, it is susceptible to damage, which can be fatal depending on the degree of injury to the skin because it defends against external attack and protects internal structures. Various types of artificial skin are being studied for transplantation to repair damaged skin, and recently, the production of replaceable skin using three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting technology has also been investigated. In this study, skin tissue was produced using a 3D bioprinter with human skin cell lines and cells extracted from mouse skin, and the printing conditions were optimized. Gelatin was used as a bioink, and fibrinogen and alginate were used for tissue hardening after printing. Printed skin tissue maintained a survival rate of 90% or more when cultured for 14 days. Culture conditions were established using 8 mM calcium chloride treatment and the skin tissue was exposed to air to optimize epidermal cell differentiation. The skin tissue was cultured for 14 days after differentiation induction by this optimized culture method, and immunofluorescent staining was performed using epidermal cell differentiation markers to investigate whether the epidermal cells had differentiated. After differentiation, loricrin, which is normally found in terminally differentiated epidermal cells, was observed in the cells at the tip of the epidermal layer, and cytokeratin 14 was expressed in the lower cells of the epidermis layer. Collectively, this study may provide optimized conditions for bioprinting and keratinization for three-dimensional skin production.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.18.1-18.9
• /
• 2020

Background: Bone grafting has been considered the gold standard for hard tissue reconstructive surgery and is widely used for large mandibular defect reconstruction. However, the midface encompasses delicate structures that are surrounded by a complex bone architecture, which makes bone grafting using traditional methods very challenging. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a developing technology that is derived from the evolution of additive manufacturing. It enables precise development of a scaffold from different available biomaterials that mimic the shape, size, and dimension of a defect without relying only on the surgeon's skills and capabilities, and subsequently, may enhance surgical outcomes and, in turn, patient satisfaction and quality of life. Review: This review summarizes different biomaterial classes that can be used in 3D bioprinters as bioinks to fabricate bone scaffolds, including polymers, bioceramics, and composites. It also describes the advantages and limitations of the three currently used 3D bioprinting technologies: inkjet bioprinting, micro-extrusion, and laserassisted bioprinting. Conclusions: Although 3D bioprinting technology is still in its infancy and requires further development and optimization both in biomaterials and techniques, it offers great promise and potential for facial reconstruction with improved outcome.

• International Journal of Stem Cells
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.38-50
• /
• 2024

Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technology has revolutionized various fields, including stem cell research, disease modeling, and regenerative medicine. The evolution of iPSC-based models has transitioned from conventional two-dimensional systems to more physiologically relevant three-dimensional (3D) models such as spheroids and organoids. Nonetheless, there still remain challenges including limitations in creating complex 3D tissue geometry and structures, the emergence of necrotic core in existing 3D models, and limited scalability and reproducibility. 3D bioprinting has emerged as a revolutionary technology that can facilitate the development of complex 3D tissues and organs with high scalability and reproducibility. This innovative approach has the potential to effectively bridge the gap between conventional iPSC models and complex 3D tissues in vivo. This review focuses on current trends and advancements in the bioprinting of iPSCs. Specifically, it covers the fundamental concepts and techniques of bioprinting and bioink design, reviews recent progress in iPSC bioprinting research with a specific focus on bioprinting undifferentiated iPSCs, and concludes by discussing existing limitations and future prospects.