Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting, or additive manufacturing, is a rapid fabrication technique with the foremost objective of creating biomimetic tissue and organ replacements in hopes of restoring normal tissue function and structure. Generating the engineered organs with an infrastructure that is similar to that of the real organs can be beneficial to simulate the functional organs that work inside our bodies. Photopolymerization-based 3D bioprinting, or photocuring, has emerged as a promising method in engineering biomimetic tissues due to its simplicity, and noninvasive and spatially controllable approach. In this review, we investigated types of 3D printers, mainstream materials, photoinitiators, phototoxicity, and selected tissue engineering applications of 3D photopolymerization bioprinting.
Impact statement
The main goal of this review article is to present recent developments in utilizing light-based or light-assisted three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting for tissue engineering applications. In this study, we discuss several 3D printing technologies, materials (photopolymerizable hydrogels), and photoinitiators, which are key factors to consider when utilizing photoinduced polymerization to engineer tissues or organs in vitro.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HuangNF, SerpooshanV, MorrisVB, et al.Big bottlenecks in cardiovascular tissue engineering. Commun Biol, 2018; 1(1):199.
2.
MastrulloV, CatheryW, VelliouE, et al.Angiogenesis in tissue engineering: As nature intended?. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2020; 8:188.
3.
KhademhosseiniA, LangerR. A decade of progress in tissue engineering. Nat Protoc, 2016; 11(10):1775–1781.
4.
AtilaD, HasirciV, TezcanerA. Coaxial electrospinning of composite mats comprised of core/shell poly(methyl methacrylate)/silk fibroin fibers for tissue engineering applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2022; 128:105105.
5.
TamTT, Zuratul AinAH, CheongKY, et al.Effect of annealing on PLCL scaffold fabricated by freeze-drying technique for vascular tissue engineering. Materialstoday Proceed, 2022; 66:3000–3007.
6.
PoursamarSA, LehnerAN, AzamiM, et al.The effects of crosslinkers on physical, mechanical, and cytotoxic properties of gelatin sponge prepared via in-situ gas foaming method as a tissue engineering scaffold. Mater Sci Eng C, 2016; 63:1–9.
7.
HuC, TerceroC, IkedaS, et al.Biodegradable porous sheet-like scaffolds for soft-tissue engineering using a combined particulate leaching of salt particles and magnetic sugar particles. J Biosci Bioeng, 2013; 116(1):126–131.
8.
AbzanN, KharazihaM, LabbafS. Development of three-dimensional piezoelectric polyvinylidene fluoride-graphene oxide scaffold by non-solvent induced phase separation method for nerve tissue engineering. Mater Des, 2019; 167:107636.
9.
PrasadA, SankarMR, KatiyarV. State of art on solvent casting particulate leaching method for orthopedic scaffoldsfabrication. Materialstoday Proceed, 2017; 4(2, Part A):898–907.
10.
Gungor-OzkerimPS, InciI, ZhangYS, et al.Bioinks for 3D bioprinting: An overview. Biomater Sci, 2018; 6(5):915–946.
11.
AiX, LiX, YuY, et al.The Mechanical, Thermal, Rheological and Morphological Properties of PLA/PBAT Blown Films by Using Bis(tert-butyl dioxy isopropyl) Benzene as crosslinking agent. Polym Eng Sci, 2019; 59(S1):E227–E236.
12.
Reyna-UrrutiaVA, Mata-HaroV, Cauich-RodriguezJV, et al.Effect of two crosslinking methods on the physicochemical and biological properties of the collagen-chitosan scaffolds. Eur Polym J, 2019; 117:424–433.
13.
YuK-F, LuT-Y, LiY-CE, et al.Design and synthesis of stem cell-laden keratin/glycol chitosan methacrylate bioinks for 3D bioprinting. Biomacromolecules, 2022; 23(7):2814–2826.
14.
WangJ, LiuY, ZhangX, et al.3D printed agar/calcium alginate hydrogels with high shape fidelity and tailorable mechanical properties. Polymer, 2021; 214:123238.
15.
MasriS, FauziFA, HasnizamSB, et al.Engineered-skin of single dermal layer containing printed hybrid gelatin-polyvinyl alcohol bioink via 3D-bioprinting: In vitro assessment under submerged vs. air-lifting models. Pharmaceuticals, 2022; 15(11):1328.
16.
WuZ, XieS, KangY, et al.Biocompatibility evaluation of a 3D-bioprinted alginate-GelMA-bacteria nanocellulose (BNC) scaffold laden with oriented-growth RSC96 cells. Mater Sci Eng C, 2021; 129:112393.
17.
ChoiG, ChaHJ. Recent advances in the development of nature-derived photocrosslinkable biomaterials for 3D printing in tissue engineering. Biomater Res, 2019; 23(1):18.
18.
Arslan-YildizA, AssalRE, ChenP, et al.Towards artificial tissue models: Past, present, and future of 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication, 2016; 8(1):014103.
19.
ZhangF, ZhuL, LiZ, et al.The recent development of vat photopolymerization: A review. Addit Manufacturing, 2021; 48:102423.
20.
WangY, ZhangS, WangJ. Photo-crosslinkable hydrogel and its biological applications. Chin Chem Lett, 2021; 32(5):1603–1614.
21.
GrigoryanB, SazerDW, AvilaA, et al.Development, characterization, and applications of multi-material stereolithography bioprinting. Sci Reports, 2021; 11(1):3171.
22.
HoffmannA, LeonardsH, TobiesN, et al.New stereolithographic resin providing functional surfaces for biocompatible three-dimensional printing. J Tissue Eng, 2017; 8:2041731417744485.
23.
KadryH, WadnapS, XuC, et al.Digital light processing (DLP) 3D-printing technology and photoreactive polymers in fabrication of modified-release tablets. Eur J Pharm Sci, 2019; 135:60–67.
24.
BernalPN, DelrotP, LoterieD, et al.Volumetric bioprinting of complex living-tissue constructs within seconds. Adv Mater, 2019; 31(42):1904209.
25.
NaghiehS, SarkerM, IzadifarM, et al.Dispensing-based bioprinting of mechanically-functional hybrid scaffolds with vessel-like channels for tissue engineering applications – A brief review. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2018; 78:298–314.
26.
WangS, ZhangL, MaR, et al.A novel one-pot strategy to construct 3D-printable cellulose nanofiber/poly(deep eutectic solvent) conductive elastomers. Chem Eng J, 2023; 454:140022.
27.
ZhuangP, NgWL, AnJ, et al.Layer-by-layer ultraviolet assisted extrusion-based (UAE) bioprinting of hydrogel constructs with high aspect ratio for soft tissue engineering applications. PLoS One, 2019; 14(6):e0216776.
28.
LiuX, GaihreB, GeorgeMN, et al.3D bioprinting of oligo(poly[ethylene glycol] fumarate) for bone and nerve tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2021; 109(1):6–17.
29.
SolisLH, AyalaY, PortilloS, et al.Thermal inkjet bioprinting triggers the activation of the VEGF pathway in human microvascular endothelial cells in vitro. Biofabrication, 2019; 11(4):045005.
30.
AlcinesioA, MeacockOJ, AllanRG, et al.Controlled packing and single-droplet resolution of 3D-printed functional synthetic tissues. Nat Commun, 2020; 11(1):2105.
31.
LiX, LiuB, PeiB, et al.Inkjet bioprinting of biomaterials. Chem Rev, 2020; 120(19):10793–10833.
32.
GaoG, SchillingAF, HubbellK, et al.Improved properties of bone and cartilage tissue from 3D inkjet-bioprinted human mesenchymal stem cells by simultaneous deposition and photocrosslinking in PEG-GelMA. Biotechnol Lett, 2015; 37(11):2349–2355.
33.
CuiX, GaoG, YonezawaT, et al.Human cartilage tissue fabrication using three-dimensional inkjet printing technology. J Vis Exp, 2014; 88:51294.
34.
KeriquelV, OliveiraH, RémyM, et al.In situ printing of mesenchymal stromal cells, by laser-assisted bioprinting, for in vivo bone regeneration applications. Sci Reports, 2017; 7(1):1778.
35.
DesrusH, ChassagneB, CatrosS, et al.Laser assisted bioprinting using a femtosecond laser with and without a gold transductive layer: a parametric study. Proc. SPIE 9706, Optical Interactions with Tissue and Cells XXVII, 97060O 2016;10.1117/12.2209087.
36.
SorkioA, KochL, KoivusaloL, et al.Human stem cell based corneal tissue mimicking structures using laser-assisted 3D bioprinting and functional bioinks. Biomaterials, 2018; 171:57–71.
37.
RajabasadiF, SchwarzL, Medina-SánchezM, et al.3D and 4D lithography of untethered microrobots. Prog Mater Sci, 2021; 120:100808.
38.
HarinarayanaV, ShinYC. Two-photon lithography for three-dimensional fabrication in micro/nanoscale regime: A comprehensive review. Opt Laser Technol, 2021; 142:107180.
39.
JaiswalA, RastogiCK, RaniS, et al.Two decades of two-photon lithography: Materials science perspective for additive manufacturing of 2D/3D nano-microstructures. iScience, 2023; 26(4):106374.
40.
MarinoA, CiofaniG, FilippeschiC, et al.Two-Photon Polymerization of Sub-micrometric Patterned Surfaces: Investigation of Cell-Substrate Interactions and Improved Differentiation of Neuron-like Cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2013; 5(24):13012–13021.
41.
ValenteF, HepburnMS, ChenJ, et al.Bioprinting silk fibroin using two-photon lithography enables control over the physico-chemical material properties and cellular response. Bioprinting, 2022; 25:e00183.
42.
ZhangQ, BeiH-P, ZhaoM, et al.Shedding light on 3D printing: Printing photo-crosslinkable constructs for tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2022; 286:121566.
43.
GuoL, LiangZ, YangL, et al.The role of natural polymers in bone tissue engineering. J Controll Release, 2021; 338:571–582.
44.
BupphathongS, QuirozC, HuangW, et al.Gelatin methacrylate hydrogel for tissue engineering applications—a review on material modifications. Pharmaceuticals, 2022; 15(2):171.
45.
LeeJ, HongJ, KimW, et al.Bone-derived dECM/alginate bioink for fabricating a 3D cell-laden mesh structure for bone tissue engineering. Carbohydr Polym, 2020; 250:116914.
46.
ElomaaL, KeshiE, SauerIM, et al.Development of GelMA/PCL and dECM/PCL resins for 3D printing of acellular in vitro tissue scaffolds by stereolithography. Mater Sci Eng C, 2020; 112:110958.
47.
MaoQ, WangY, LiY, et al.Fabrication of liver microtissue with liver decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM) bioink by digital light processing (DLP) bioprinting. Mater Sci Eng C, 2020; 109:110625.
48.
VisscherDO, LeeH, van ZuijlenPPM, et al.A photo-crosslinkable cartilage-derived extracellular matrix bioink for auricular cartilage tissue engineering. Acta Biomater, 2021; 121:193–203.
49.
HongH, SeoYB, KimDY, et al.Digital light processing 3D printed silk fibroin hydrogel for cartilage tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2020; 232:119679.
50.
RajputM, MondalP, YadavP, et al.Light-based 3D bioprinting of bone tissue scaffolds with tunable mechanical properties and architecture from photocurable silk fibroin. Int J Biol Macromol, 2022; 202:644–656.
51.
ZhouL, WangZ, ChenD, et al.An injectable and photocurable methacrylate-silk fibroin hydrogel loaded with bFGF for spinal cord regeneration. Mater Des, 2022; 217:110670.
52.
BessonovIV, RochevYA, ArkhipovaAY, et al.Fabrication of hydrogel scaffolds via photocrosslinking of methacrylated silk fibroin. Biomed Mater, 2019; 14(3):034102.
53.
IzadifarM, ChapmanD, BabynP, et al.UV-Assisted 3D bioprinting of nanoreinforced hybrid cardiac patch for myocardial tissue engineering. Tissue Eng C Methods, 2017; 24(2):74–88.
54.
JinL, ParkK, YoonY, et al.Visible light-cured antibacterial collagen hydrogel containing water-solubilized triclosan for improved wound healing. Materials, 2021; 14:2270.
55.
BoddupalliA, BratlieKM. Collagen organization deposited by fibroblasts encapsulated in pH responsive methacrylated alginate hydrogels. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2018; 106(11):2934–2943.
56.
JeonO, LeeYB, HintonTJ, et al.Cryopreserved cell-laden alginate microgel bioink for 3D bioprinting of living tissues. Mater Today Chem, 2019; 12:61–70.
57.
ZhaoD, TieC, ChengB, et al.Effect of altering photocrosslinking conditions on the physical properties of alginate gels and the survival of photoencapsulated cells. Polym Degradation Stability, 2020; 179:109297.
58.
JeonO, BouhadirKH, MansourJM, et al.Photocrosslinked alginate hydrogels with tunable biodegradation rates and mechanical properties. Biomaterials, 2009; 30(14):2724–2734.
59.
ChangHK, YangDH, HaMY, et al.3D printing of cell-laden visible light curable glycol chitosan bioink for bone tissue engineering. Carbohydr Polym, 2022; 287:119328.
60.
ShenY, TangH, HuangX, et al.DLP printing photocurable chitosan to build bio-constructs for tissue engineering. Carbohydr Polym, 2020; 235:115970.
61.
CuiZ-K, KimS, BaljonJJ, et al.Microporous methacrylated glycol chitosan-montmorillonite nanocomposite hydrogel for bone tissue engineering. Nat Commun, 2019; 10(1):3523.
62.
ZanonM, ChiapponeA, GarinoN, et al.Microwave-assisted methacrylation of chitosan for 3D printable hydrogels in tissue engineering. Mater Adv, 2021; 3:514–525.
63.
Della GiustinaG, GandinA, BrigoL, et al.Polysaccharide hydrogels for multiscale 3D printing of pullulan scaffolds. Mater Des, 2019; 165:107566.
BaeH, AhariAF, ShinH, et al.Cell-laden microengineered pullulan methacrylate hydrogels promote cell proliferation and 3D cluster formation. Soft Matter, 2011; 7(5):1903–1911.
66.
FengZ, LiJ, ZhouD, et al.A novel photocurable pullulan-based bioink for digital light processing 3D printing. Int J Bioprint, 2023; 9(2):2022.
67.
MaX, DewanS, LiuJ, et al.3D printed micro-scale force gauge arrays to improve human cardiac tissue maturation and enable high throughput drug testing. Acta Biomater, 2019; 95:319–327.
68.
LiangJ, GuoZ, TimmermanA, et al.Enhanced mechanical and cell adhesive properties of photo-crosslinked PEG hydrogels by incorporation of gelatin in the networks. Biomed Mater, 2019; 14(2):024102.
69.
LewisKJR, TibbittMW, ZhaoY, et al.In vitro model alveoli from photodegradable microsphere templates. Biomater Sci, 2015; 3(6):821–832.
70.
GrigoryanB, PaulsenSJ, CorbettDC, et al.Multivascular networks and functional intravascular topologies within biocompatible hydrogels. Science, 2019; 364(6439):458–464.
71.
ZhangC, LiangK, ZhouD, et al.High-performance photopolymerized poly(vinyl alcohol)/silica nanocomposite hydrogels with enhanced cell adhesion. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2018; 10(33):27692–27700.
72.
GoldvaserM, EpsteinE, RosenO, et al.Poly(vinyl alcohol)-methacrylate with CRDG peptide: A photocurable biocompatible hydrogel. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2021; 16(2):140–150.
73.
HeY, TuckC, PrinaE, et al.A new photocrosslinkable polycaprolactone-based ink for three-dimensional inkjet printing: Polycaprolactone-based ink for 3D inkjet printing. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2016; 105(6):1645–1657.
74.
KlugeJA, MauckRL. Synthetic/Biopolymer Nanofibrous Composites as Dynamic Tissue Engineering Scaffolds. In: Biomedical Applications of Polymeric Nanofibers. (Jayakumar R, Nair S. eds.) Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg; 2012; pp. 101–130.
75.
SuamteL, TirkeyA, BabuPJ. Design of 3D smart scaffolds using natural, synthetic and hybrid derived polymers for skin regenerative applications. Smart Mater Med, 2023; 4:243–256.
76.
HuQ, LuR, LiuS, et al.3D Printing GelMA/PVA Interpenetrating Polymer Networks Scaffolds Mediated with CuO Nanoparticles for Angiogenesis. Macromol Biosci, 2022; 22(10):2200208.
77.
WangY, MaM, WangJ, et al.Development of a photo-crosslinking, biodegradable GelMA/PEGDA hydrogel for guided bone regeneration materials. Materials, 2018; 11(8):1345.
78.
Camci-UnalG, CutticaD, AnnabiN, et al.Synthesis and characterization of hybrid hyaluronic acid-gelatin hydrogels. Biomacromolecules, 2013; 14(4):1085–1092.
79.
OsiAR, ZhangH, ChenJ, et al.Three-dimensional-printable thermo/photo-cross-linked methacrylated chitosan–gelatin hydrogel composites for tissue engineering. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2021; 13(19):22902–22913.
80.
ZhuW, QuX, ZhuJ, et al.Direct 3D bioprinting of prevascularized tissue constructs with complex microarchitecture. Biomaterials, 2017; 124:106–115.
81.
LiuJ, HeJ, LiuJ, et al.Rapid 3D bioprinting of in vitro cardiac tissue models using human embryonic stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Bioprinting, 2019; 13:e00040.
82.
MahdaviSS, AbdekhodaieMJ, KumarH, et al.Stereolithography 3D bioprinting method for fabrication of human corneal stroma equivalent. Ann Biomed Eng, 2020; 48(7):1955–1970.
83.
Thattaruparambil RaveendranN, VaquetteC, MeinertC, et al.Optimization of 3D bioprinting of periodontal ligament cells. Dent Mater, 2019; 35(12):1683–1694.
84.
LiuC, DaiT, WuX, et al.3D bioprinting of cell-laden nano-attapulgite/gelatin methacrylate composite hydrogel scaffolds for bone tissue repair. J Mater Sci Technol, 2023; 135:111–125.
85.
RaveendranN, IvanovskiS, VaquetteC. The effect of culture conditions on the bone regeneration potential of osteoblast-laden 3D bioprinted constructs. Acta Biomater, 2023; 156:190–201.
86.
Kilic BektasC, HasirciV. Cell loaded 3D bioprinted GelMA hydrogels for corneal stroma engineering. Biomater Sci, 2019; 8:438–449.
87.
SkMM, DasP, PanwarA, et al.Synthesis and characterization of site selective photo-crosslinkable glycidyl methacrylate functionalized gelatin-based 3D hydrogel scaffold for liver tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C, 2021; 123:111694.
88.
SharifiS, SharifiH, AkbariA, et al.Photo-cross-linked gelatin glycidyl methacrylate/N-vinylpyrrolidone copolymeric hydrogel with tunable mechanical properties for ocular tissue engineering applications. ACS Appl Bio Mater, 2021; 4(10):7682–7691.
89.
TignerTJ, RajputS, GaharwarAK, et al.Comparison of photo cross linkable gelatin derivatives and initiators for three-dimensional extrusion bioprinting. Biomacromolecules, 2020; 21(2):454–463.
90.
WangP, LiX, 朱 伟, et al. 3D bioprinting of hydrogels for retina cell culturing. Bioprinting. 2018; 12:e00029.
91.
NgoTB, SpearmanBS, HlavacN, et al.Three-dimensional bioprinted hyaluronic acid hydrogel test beds for assessing neural cell responses to competitive growth stimuli. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2020; 6(12):6819–6830.
92.
WenzA, BorchersK, TovarGEM, et al.Bone matrix production in hydroxyapatite-modified hydrogels suitable for bone bioprinting. Biofabrication, 2017; 9(4):044103.
93.
GongM, YanF, YuL, et al.A dopamine-methacrylated hyaluronic acid hydrogel as an effective carrier for stem cells in skin regeneration therapy. Cell Death Dis, 2022; 13(8):738.
94.
TsanaktsidouE, KammonaO, KiparissidesC. On the synthesis and characterization of biofunctional hyaluronic acid based injectable hydrogels for the repair of cartilage lesions. Eur Polym J, 2019; 114:47–56.
95.
PappasSP.20 - Photoinitiated Polymerization. In: Comprehensive Polymer Science and Supplements. (Allen G, Bevington JC. eds.) Pergamon: Amsterdam; 1989; pp. 337–355.
96.
MenteA, O'DonnellM, RangarajanS, et al.Urinary sodium excretion, blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and mortality: A community-level prospective epidemiological cohort study. Lancet, 2018; 392(10146):496–506.
97.
XuH, CasillasJ, KrishnamoorthyS, et al.Effects of Irgacure 2959 and lithium phenyl-2,4,6-trimethylbenzoylphosphinate on cell viability, physical properties, and microstructure in 3D bioprinting of vascular-like constructs. Biomed Mater, 2020; 15(5):055021.
98.
KrishnamoorthyS, NooraniB, xuC. Effects of encapsulated cells on the physical–mechanical properties and microstructure of gelatin methacrylate hydrogels. Int J Mol Sci, 2019; 20:5061.
99.
PahoffS, MeinertC, BasO, et al.Effect of gelatin source and photoinitiator type on chondrocyte redifferentiation in gelatin methacryloyl-based tissue-engineered cartilage constructs. J Mater Chem B, 2019; 7:1761–1772.
100.
ZhaoX, LangQ, YildirimerL, et al.Photocrosslinkable gelatin hydrogel for epidermal tissue engineering. Adv Healthcare Mater, 2016; 5(1):108–118.
101.
ZhaoD, WangX, TieC, et al.Bio-functional strontium-containing photocrosslinked alginate hydrogels for promoting the osteogenic behaviors. Mater Sci Eng C, 2021; 126:112130.
102.
WuZ, LiuJ, LinJ, et al.Novel digital light processing printing strategy using a collagen-based bioink with prospective cross-linker procyanidins. Biomacromolecules, 2022; 23(1):240–252.
103.
XieM, ShiY, ZhangC, et al.In situ 3D bioprinting with bioconcrete bioink. Nat Commun, 2022; 13(1):3597.
104.
NguyenT-U, WatkinsKE, KishoreV. Photochemically crosslinked cell-laden methacrylated collagen hydrogels with high cell viability and functionality. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2019; 107(7):1541–1550.
105.
RouillardAD, BerglundCM, LeeJY, et al.Methods for photocrosslinking alginate hydrogel scaffolds with high cell viability. Tissue Eng C Methods, 2010; 17(2):173–179.
106.
WangZ, KumarH, TianZ, et al.Visible light photoinitiation of cell-adhesive gelatin methacryloyl hydrogels for stereolithography 3D bioprinting. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2018; 10(32):26859–26869.
107.
SharifiS, IslamMM, SharifiH, et al.Tuning gelatin-based hydrogel towards bioadhesive ocular tissue engineering applications. Bioactive Mater, 2021; 6(11):3947–3961.
108.
SpäterT, MariyanatsAO, SyachinaMA, et al.In vitro and in vivo analysis of adhesive, anti-inflammatory, and proangiogenic properties of novel 3D printed hyaluronic acid glycidyl methacrylate hydrogel scaffolds for tissue engineering. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2020; 6(10):5744–5757.
109.
SavelyevA, SochilinaA, AkasovR, et al.Extrusion-Based 3D printing of photocurable hydrogels in presence of flavin mononucleotide for tissue engineering. Sovremennye Tehnol Med, 2018; 10:88.
110.
ZhaiX, RuanC, MaY, et al.3D-bioprinted osteoblast-laden nanocomposite hydrogel constructs with induced microenvironments promote cell viability, differentiation, and osteogenesis both in vitro and in vivo. Adv Sci, 2018; 5(3):1700550.
111.
ZhengZ, EglinD, AliniM, et al.Visible light-induced 3D bioprinting technologies and corresponding bioink materials for tissue engineering: A review. Engineering, 2021; 7(7):966–978.
112.
KumarH, KimK.Stereolithography 3D Bioprinting. In: 3D Bioprinting: Principles and Protocols. (Crook JM. ed.) Springer US: New York, NY; 2020; pp. 93–108.
113.
AllushiA, KutahyaC, AydoganC, et al.Conventional Type II photoinitiators as activators for photoinduced metal-free atom transfer radical polymerization. Polym Chem, 2017; 8(12):1972–1977.
ZengB, CaiZ, LalevéeJ, et al.Cytotoxic and cytocompatible comparison among seven photoinitiators-triggered polymers in different tissue cells. Toxicol In Vitro, 2021; 72:105103.
116.
KimG-T, GoH-B, YuJ-H, et al.Cytotoxicity, colour stability and dimensional accuracy of 3D printing resin with three different photoinitiators. Polymers, 2022; 14:979.
117.
WangZ, AbdullaR, ParkerB, et al.A simple and high-resolution stereolithography-based 3D bioprinting system using visible light crosslinkable bioinks. Biofabrication, 2015; 7(4):045009.
118.
XuH, LiuQ, CasillasJ, et al.Prediction of cell viability in dynamic optical projection stereolithography-based bioprinting using machine learning. J Intelligent Manufacturing, 2022; 33(4):995–1005.
119.
KhoshakhlaghP, BowserD, BrownJ, et al.Comparison of visible and UVA phototoxicity in neural culture systems micropatterned with digital projection photolithography: Comparison of visible and UVA phototoxicity in neural culture systems. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2018; 107(1):134–144.
120.
ParthibanSP, AthirasalaA, TahayeriA, et al.BoneMA—synthesis and characterization of a methacrylated bone-derived hydrogel for bioprinting of in-vitro vascularized tissue constructs. Biofabrication, 2021; 13(3):035031.
121.
KatoB, WisserG, AgrawalD, et al.3D bioprinting of cardiac tissue: current challenges and perspectives. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2021; 32(5):54.
122.
MaN, CheungD, ButcherJ. Incorporating nanocrystalline cellulose into a multifunctional hydrogel for heart valve tissue engineering applications. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2021; 110(1):76–91.
123.
LiuJ, MillerK, MaX, et al.Direct 3D bioprinting of cardiac micro-tissues mimicking native myocardium. Biomaterials, 2020; 256:120204.
124.
PienN, PezzoliD, Van HoorickJ, et al.Development of photo-crosslinkable collagen hydrogel building blocks for vascular tissue engineering applications: A superior alternative to methacrylated gelatin?. Mater Sci Eng C, 2021; 130:112460.
125.
ScarrittM, PashosN, MotherwellJ, et al.Re-endothelialization of rat lung scaffolds through passive, gravity-driven seeding of segment-specific pulmonary endothelial cells: Re-endothelialization of rat lung scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2016; 12(2):e786–e806.
126.
PetersenTH, CalleEA, ColehourMB, et al.Bioreactor for the long-term culture of lung tissue. Cell Transplant, 2011; 20(7):1117–1126.
127.
NicholsJ, FrancescaS, NilesJ, et al.Production and transplantation of bioengineered lung into a large-animal model. Sci Transl Med, 2018; 10(452):eaao3926.
HuoY, XuY, WuX, et al.Functional trachea reconstruction using 3D-bioprinted native-like tissue architecture based on designable tissue-specific bioinks. Adv Sci, 2022; 9(29):2202181.
130.
AtalaA, BauerSB, SokerS, et al.Tissue-engineered autologous bladders for patients needing cystoplasty. Lancet, 2006; 367(9518):1241–1246.
131.
XuK, HanY, HuangY, et al.The application of 3D bioprinting in urological diseases. Mater Today Bio, 2022; 16:100388.
132.
AliM, R AK, YooJ, et al.A Photo-Crosslinkable Kidney ECM-derived bioink accelerates renal tissue formation. Adv Healthcare Mater, 2019; 8:1800992.
133.
GuX, XuY, LiS, et al.Preparation of a photocured biocompatible hydrogel for urethral tissue engineering. ACS Appl Polym Mater, 2021; 3(7):3519–3527.
134.
KalraA, YetiskulE, WehrleCJ, et al.Physiology, Liver. BTI - StatPearls. 2022.
135.
MahmudNA-O.Selection for liver transplantation: Indications and evaluation. Curr Hepatol Rep, 2020; 19(3):203–212.
136.
RavichandranA, MurekateteB, MoedderD, et al.Photocrosslinkable liver extracellular matrix hydrogels for the generation of 3D liver microenvironment models. Sci Reports, 2021; 11(1):15566.
137.
HeydariZ, NajimiM, MirzaeiH, et al.Tissue engineering in liver regenerative medicine: Insights into novel translational technologies. Cells, 2020; 9:304.
138.
KangJ, DongE, LiD, et al.Anisotropy characteristics of microstructures for bone substitutes and porous implants with application of additive manufacturing in orthopaedic. Mater Des, 2020; 191:108608.
139.
RiesterO, BorgolteM, CsukR, et al.Challenges in bone tissue regeneration: Stem cell therapy, biofunctionality and antimicrobial properties of novel materials and its evolution. Int J Mol Sci, 2021; 22(1):192.
140.
YanY, ChenH, ZhangH, et al.Vascularized 3D printed scaffolds for promoting bone regeneration. Biomaterials, 2019; 190–191:97–110.
141.
ShenM, WangL, GaoY, et al.3D bioprinting of in situ vascularized tissue engineered bone for repairing large segmental bone defects. Mater Today Bio, 2022; 16:100382.
142.
DehghaniF, FathiA. Challenges for Cartilage Regeneration. In: Biomaterials for Implants and Scaffolds. (Li Q, Mai YW. eds.) Springer Series in Biomaterials Science and Engineering, vol 8. Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg;, 2017; doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-53574-5_14
143.
CaoY, ChengP, SangS, et al.Mesenchymal stem cells loaded on 3D-printed gradient poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/methacrylated alginate composite scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering. Regen Biomater, 2021; 8(3):rbab019.
144.
HuY, ZhangH, WeiH, et al.Scaffolds with anisotropic structure for neural tissue engineering. Eng Regen, 2022; 3(2):154–162.
145.
DobladoLR, Martínez-RamosC, PradasMM. Biomaterials for neural tissue engineering. Front Nanotechnol, 2021; 3.
146.
YeW, LiH, YuK, et al.3D printing of gelatin methacrylate-based nerve guidance conduits with multiple channels. Mater Des, 2020; 192:108757.
147.
ZhuW, TringaleKR, WollerSA, et al.Rapid continuous 3D printing of customizable peripheral nerve guidance conduits. Mater Today, 2018; 21(9):951–959.
148.
SternJH, TianY, FunderburghJ, et al.Regenerating eye tissues to preserve and restore vision. Cell Stem Cell, 2018; 22(6):834–849.
149.
ShahA, BrugnanoJ, SunS, et al.The development of a tissue-engineered cornea: Biomaterials and culture methods. Pediatr Res, 2008; 63(5):535–544.
150.
HuntNC, HallamD, ChichagovaV, et al.The application of biomaterials to tissue engineering neural retina and retinal pigment epithelium. Adv Healthcare Mater, 2018; 7(23):1800226.
151.
WangP, LiX, ZhuW, et al.3D bioprinting of hydrogels for retina cell culturing. Bioprinting, 2018; 12:e00029.
152.
Mohd HilmiAB, HalimAS. Vital roles of stem cells and biomaterials in skin tissue engineering. World J Stem Cells, 2015; 7(2):428–436.
153.
YangY, XuR, WangC, et al.Recombinant human collagen-based bioinks for the 3D bioprinting of full-thickness human skin equivalent. Int J Bioprint, 2022; 8(4):611.
