Poly(glycerol sebacate) is an attractive biomaterial for tissue engineering due to its biocompatibility, elasticity and rapid degradation rate. However, poly(glycerol sebacate) requires harsh processing conditions, involving high temperatures and vacuum for extended periods, to produce an insoluble polymer matrix. These conditions make generating accurate and intricate geometries from poly(glycerol sebacate), such as those required for tissue engineering scaffolds, difficult. Functionalising poly(glycerol sebacate) with methacrylate groups produces a photocurable polymer, poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate, which can be rapidly crosslinked into an insoluble matrix. Capitalising on these improved processing capabilities, here, we present a variety of approaches for fabricating porous tissue engineering scaffolds from poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate using sucrose porogen leaching combined with other manufacturing methods. Mould-based techniques were used to produce porous disk-shaped and tubular scaffolds. Porogen size was shown to influence scaffold porosity and mechanical performance, and the porous poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate scaffolds supported the proliferation of primary fibroblasts in vitro. Additionally, scaffolds with spatially variable mechanical properties were generated by combining variants of poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate with different stiffness. Finally, subtractive and additive manufacturing methods were developed with the capabilities to generate porous poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate scaffolds from digital designs. These hybrid manufacturing strategies offer the ability to produce accurate macroscale poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate scaffolds with tailored microscale porosity and spatially resolved mechanical properties suitable for a broad range of applications across tissue engineering.
KhademhosseiniALangerR.A decade of progress in tissue engineering. Nat Protoc2016;
11: 1775–1781.
2.
JafariMPaknejadZRadMR, et al.
Polymeric scaffolds in tissue engineering: a literature review: polymeric scaffolds in tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater2017;
105: 431–459.
3.
RaiRTallawiMGrigoreA, et al.
Synthesis, properties and biomedical applications of poly(glycerol sebacate) (PGS): a review. Prog Polym Sci2012;
37: 1051–1078.
4.
KharazihaMNikkhahMShinS-R, et al.
PGS:gelatin nanofibrous scaffolds with tunable mechanical and structural properties for engineering cardiac tissues. Biomaterials2013;
34: 6355–6366.
5.
ChenQ-ZIshiiHThouasGA, et al.
An elastomeric patch derived from poly(glycerol sebacate) for delivery of embryonic stem cells to the heart. Biomaterials2010;
31: 3885–3893.
6.
RadisicMParkHMartensTP, et al.
Pre-treatment of synthetic elastomeric scaffolds by cardiac fibroblasts improves engineered heart tissue. J Biomed Mater Res A2008;
86: 713–724.
7.
LeeK-WGadePSDongL, et al.
A biodegradable synthetic graft for small arteries matches the performance of autologous vein in rat carotid arteries. Biomaterials2018;
181: 67–80.
8.
WuWAllenRAWangY.Fast-degrading elastomer enables rapid remodeling of a cell-free synthetic graft into a neoartery. Nat Med2012;
18: 1148–1153.
9.
LeeK-WStolzDBWangY.Substantial expression of mature elastin in arterial constructs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2011;
108: 2705–2710.
10.
PritchardCDArnérKMLangerRS, et al.
Retinal transplantation using surface modified poly(glycerol-co-sebacic acid) membranes. Biomaterials2010;
31: 7978–7984.
11.
SundbackCAShyuJYWangY, et al.
Biocompatibility analysis of poly(glycerol sebacate) as a nerve guide material. Biomaterials2005;
26: 5454–5464.
12.
HagandoraCKGaoJWangY, et al.
Poly (glycerol sebacate): a novel scaffold material for temporomandibular joint disc engineering. Tissue Eng Part A2012;
19: 729–737.
13.
KemppainenJMHollisterSJ.Tailoring the mechanical properties of 3D-designed poly(glycerol sebacate) scaffolds for cartilage applications. J Biomed Mater Res A2010;
94: 9–18.
14.
JeongCGHollisterSJ.A comparison of the influence of material on in vitro cartilage tissue engineering with PCL, PGS, and POC 3D scaffold architecture seeded with chondrocytes. Biomaterials2010;
31: 4304–4312.
15.
WangYAmeerGASheppardBJ, et al.
A tough biodegradable elastomer. Nat Biotechnol2002;
20: 602–606.
16.
LiYCookWDMoorhoffC, et al.
Synthesis, characterization and properties of biocompatible poly(glycerol sebacate) pre-polymer and gel. Polym Int2013;
62: 534–547.
17.
LeeMWuBMDunnJ.Effect of scaffold architecture and pore size on smooth muscle cell growth. J Biomed Mater Res A2008;
87: 1010–1016.
18.
KarandeTSOngJLAgrawalCM.Diffusion in musculoskeletal tissue engineering scaffolds: design issues related to porosity, permeability, architecture, and nutrient mixing. Ann Biomed Eng2004;
32: 1728–1743.
19.
ZeltingerJSherwoodJKGrahamDA, et al.
Effect of pore size and void fraction on cellular adhesion, proliferation, and matrix deposition. Tissue Eng2001;
7: 557–572.
20.
ZhangRMaPX.Synthetic nano-fibrillar extracellular matrices with predesigned macroporous architectures. J Biomed Mater Res2000;
52: 430–438.
21.
GomesMERodriguesMTDominguesRMA, et al.
Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: new trends and directions – a year in review. Tissue Eng Part B Rev2017;
23: 211–224.
22.
WangMLeiDLiuZ, et al.
A poly(glycerol sebacate) based photo/thermo dual curable biodegradable and biocompatible polymer for biomedical applications. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2017;
28: 1728–1739.
23.
BodakheSVermaSGarkhalK, et al.
Injectable photocrosslinkable nanocomposite based on poly(glycerol sebacate) fumarate and hydroxyapatite: development, biocompatibility and bone regeneration in a rat calvarial bone defect model. Nanomedicine (Lond)2013;
8: 1777–1795.
24.
IfkovitsJLPaderaRFBurdickJA.Biodegradable and radically polymerized elastomers with enhanced processing capabilities. Biomed Mater2008;
3: 034104.
25.
NijstCLEBruggemanJPKarpJM, et al.
Synthesis and characterization of photocurable elastomers from poly(glycerol-co-sebacate). Biomacromolecules2007;
8: 3067–3073.
26.
Pashneh-TalaSOwenRBahmaeeH, et al. Synthesis, characterization and 3D micro-structuring via 2-photon polymerization of poly(glycerol sebacate)-methacrylate – an elastomeric degradable polymer. Front Phys. Epub ahead of print 8 May 2018. DOI: 10.3389/fphy.2018.00041.
27.
KumarAPlaconeJKEnglerAJ.Understanding the extracellular forces that determine cell fate and maintenance. Development2017;
144: 4261–4270.
28.
SridharBVBrockJLSilverJS, et al.
Development of a cellularly degradable PEG hydrogel to promote articular cartilage extracellular matrix deposition. Adv Healthcare Mater2015;
4: 702–713.
29.
O’DeaRDOsborneJMEl HajAJ, et al.
The interplay between tissue growth and scaffold degradation in engineered tissue constructs. J Math Biol2013;
67: 1199–1225.
30.
GhoshKIngberDE.Micromechanical control of cell and tissue development: implications for tissue engineering. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2007;
59: 1306–1318.
ThadavirulNPavasantPSupapholP.Development of polycaprolactone porous scaffolds by combining solvent casting, particulate leaching, and polymer leaching techniques for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A2014;
102: 3379–3392.
33.
MeinelLKarageorgiouVHofmannS, et al.
Engineering bone-like tissue in vitro using human bone marrow stem cells and silk scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A2004;
71: 25–34.
34.
BurdickJAFrankelDDernellWS, et al.
An initial investigation of photocurable three-dimensional lactic acid based scaffolds in a critical-sized cranial defect. Biomaterials2003;
24: 1613–1620.
35.
BaheiraeiNYeganehHAiJ, et al.
Preparation of a porous conductive scaffold from aniline pentamer-modified polyurethane/PCL blend for cardiac tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A2015;
103: 3179–3187.
36.
LaschkeMWStroheAMengerMD, et al.
In vitro and in vivo evaluation of a novel nanosize hydroxyapatite particles/poly(ester-urethane) composite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater2010;
6: 2020–2027.
37.
GrenierSSandigMMequanintK.Polyurethane biomaterials for fabricating 3D porous scaffolds and supporting vascular cells. J Biomed Mater Res A2007;
82: 802–809.
38.
FalcoEEWangMOThompsonJA, et al.
Porous EH and EH-PEG scaffolds as gene delivery vehicles to skeletal muscle. Pharm Res2011;
28: 1306–1316.
39.
ZhangJMujeebAFengJ, et al.
Physically entrapped gelatin in polyethylene glycol scaffolds for three-dimensional chondrocyte culture. J Bioact Compat Polym2016;
31: 513–530.
40.
ZhangQLuHKawazoeN, et al.
Pore size effect of collagen scaffolds on cartilage regeneration. Acta Biomater2014;
10: 2005–2013.
41.
PanZDuanPLiuX, et al.
Effect of porosities of bilayered porous scaffolds on spontaneous osteochondral repair in cartilage tissue engineering. Regen Biomater2015;
2: 9–19.
42.
LiCWangLYangZ, et al.
A viscoelastic chitosan-modified three-dimensional porous poly(l-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2012;
23: 405–424.
43.
AramwitPRatanavarapornJEkgasitS, et al.
A green salt-leaching technique to produce sericin/PVA/glycerin scaffolds with distinguished characteristics for wound-dressing applications. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater2015;
103: 915–924.
44.
LiangXQiYPanZ, et al.
Design and preparation of quasi-spherical salt particles as water-soluble porogens to fabricate hydrophobic porous scaffolds for tissue engineering and tissue regeneration. Mater Chem Front2018;
2: 1539–1553.
45.
Lin-GibsonSCooperJALandisFA, et al.
Systematic investigation of porogen size and content on scaffold morphometric parameters and properties. Biomacromolecules2007;
8: 1511–1518.
46.
HuriPYOzilgenBAHuttonDL, et al.
Scaffold pore size modulates in vitro osteogenesis of human adipose-derived stem/stromal cells. Biomed Mater2014;
9: 045003.
47.
MatsikoAGleesonJPO’BrienFJ.Scaffold mean pore size influences mesenchymal stem cell chondrogenic differentiation and matrix deposition. Tissue Eng Part A2014;
21: 486–497.
48.
TaherkhaniSMoztarzadehF. Fabrication of a poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/starch nanocomposite scaffold with a solvent-casting/salt-leaching technique for bone tissue engineering applications. J Appl Polym Sci. Epub ahead of print 29 February 2016. DOI: 10.1002/app.43523.
49.
JanikHMarzecM.A review: fabrication of porous polyurethane scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl2015;
48: 586–591.
50.
BoffitoMSartoriSCiardelliG.Polymeric scaffolds for cardiac tissue engineering: requirements and fabrication technologies. Polym Int2014;
63: 2–11.
51.
CrapoPMGaoJWangY.Seamless tubular poly(glycerol sebacate) scaffolds: high-yield fabrication and potential applications. J Biomed Mater Res A2008;
86: 354–363.
52.
YousefiA-MHoqueMEPrasadR, et al.
Current strategies in multiphasic scaffold design for osteochondral tissue engineering: a review. J Biomed Mater Res A2015;
103: 2460–2481.
53.
VerdiyevaGKoshyKGlibberyN, et al.
Tendon reconstruction with tissue engineering approach – a review. J Biomed Nanotechnol2015;
11: 1495–1523.
54.
CarnachanRJBokhariMPrzyborskiSA, et al.
Tailoring the morphology of emulsion-templated porous polymers. Soft Matter2006;
2: 608.
55.
SharifpoorSSimmonsCALabowRS, et al.
Functional characterization of human coronary artery smooth muscle cells under cyclic mechanical strain in a degradable polyurethane scaffold. Biomaterials2011;
32: 4816–4829.
56.
SongYWenninkJWHKamphuisMMJ, et al.
Dynamic culturing of smooth muscle cells in tubular poly(trimethylene carbonate) scaffolds for vascular tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A2011;
17: 381–387.
57.
SmithEDentG. Chapter 1 – introduction, basic theory and principles. In: Modern Raman spectroscopy – a practical approach. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2005, pp.2–20.
58.
CastorCAJrPontierADurandJ, et al.
Real time monitoring of the quiescent suspension polymerization of methyl methacrylate in microreactors – part 1: a kinetic study by Raman spectroscopy and evolution of droplet size. Chem Eng Sci2015;
131: 340–352.
59.
AlbertsBJohnsonALewisJ, et al. Chapter 1 – cells and genomes. In: Molecular biology of the cell. NY, USA: Garland Science, 2002, pp.1–45.
60.
GaoJCrapoPMWangY.Macroporous elastomeric scaffolds with extensive micropores for soft tissue engineering. Tissue Eng2006;
12: 917–925.
61.
OhSHKangSGKimES, et al.
Fabrication and characterization of hydrophilic poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid)/poly(vinyl alcohol) blend cell scaffolds by melt-molding particulate-leaching method. Biomaterials2003;
24: 4011–4021.
62.
KimHDValentiniRF.Retention and activity of BMP-2 in hyaluronic acid-based scaffolds in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res2002;
59: 573–584.
63.
CrapoPMWangY.Physiologic compliance in engineered small-diameter arterial constructs based on an elastomeric substrate. Biomaterials2010;
31: 1626–1635.
64.
GaoJEnsleyAENeremRM, et al.
Poly(glycerol sebacate) supports the proliferation and phenotypic protein expression of primary baboon vascular cells. J Biomed Mater Res A2007;
83: 1070–1075.
65.
Pashneh-TalaSMacNeilSClaeyssensF.The tissue-engineered vascular graft – past, present, and future. Tissue Eng Part B Rev2015;
22: 68–100.
66.
ChianKSLeongMFKonoK.Regenerative medicine for oesophageal reconstruction after cancer treatment. Lancet Oncol2015;
16: e84–e92.
67.
LawJXLiauLLAminuddinBS, et al.
Tissue-engineered trachea: a review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol2016;
91: 55–63.
68.
ScaffaroRLoprestiFBottaL, et al.
Melt processed PCL/PEG scaffold with discrete pore size gradient for selective cellular infiltration. Macromol Mater Eng2016;
301: 182–190.
69.
KishanAPRobbinsABMohiuddinSF, et al.
Fabrication of macromolecular gradients in aligned fiber scaffolds using a combination of in-line blending and air-gap electrospinning. Acta Biomater2017;
56: 118–128.
70.
Diaz-GomezLSmithBTKontoyiannisPD, et al.
Multimaterial segmented fiber printing for gradient tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part C Methods2018;
25: 12–24.
71.
CioccaLDonatiDRagazziniS, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells and platelet gel improve bone deposition within CAD-CAM custom-made ceramic HA scaffolds for condyle substitution. BioMed Res Int2013; Article Id: 549742.
72.
GraysonWLFröhlichMYeagerK, et al.
Engineering anatomically shaped human bone grafts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2010;
107: 3299–3304.
73.
LuongoFManganoFGMacchiA, et al.
Custom-made synthetic scaffolds for bone reconstruction: a retrospective, multicenter clinical study on 15 patients. BioMed Res Int. Epub ahead of print2016;
3: 1–12.
74.
ManganoFMacchiAShibliJA, et al.
Maxillary ridge augmentation with custom-made CAD/CAM scaffolds. A 1-year prospective study on 10 patients. J Oral Implantol2013;
40: 561–569.
75.
ManganoFZeccaPPozzi‐TaubertS, et al.
Maxillary sinus augmentation using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. Int J Med Robot2013;
9: 331–338.
76.
BuckleyCTO’KellyKU.Fabrication and characterization of a porous multidomain hydroxyapatite scaffold for bone tissue engineering investigations. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater2010;
93: 459–467.
77.
LuLMikosAG.The importance of new processing techniques in tissue engineering. MRS Bull1996;
21: 28–32.
78.
CesaranoJDellingerJGSaavedraMP, et al.
Customization of load-bearing hydroxyapatite lattice scaffolds. Int J Appl Ceram Technol. 2005;
2: 212–220.
79.
TuttleBASmayJECesaranoJ, et al.
Robocast Pb(Zr0.95Ti0.05)O3 ceramic monoliths and composites. J Am Ceram Soc2001;
84: 872–874.
80.
LeiDYangYLiuZ, et al.
A general strategy of 3D printing thermosets for diverse applications. Mater Horiz2019;
6: 394–404.
81.
LiJZhangLLvS, et al.
Fabrication of individual scaffolds based on a patient-specific alveolar bone defect model. J Biotechnol2011;
151: 87–93.
82.
OwenRSherborneCPatersonT, et al.
Emulsion templated scaffolds with tunable mechanical properties for bone tissue engineering. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2016;
54: 159–172.
83.
PolygerinosPCorrellNMorinSA, et al.
Soft robotics: review of fluid-driven intrinsically soft devices; manufacturing, sensing, control, and applications in human-robot interaction. Adv Eng Mater2017;
19: 1700016.
84.
FeinerREngelLFleischerS, et al.
Engineered hybrid cardiac patches with multifunctional electronics for online monitoring and regulation of tissue function. Nat Mater2016;
15: 679–685.
85.
ZhaoQDunlopJWCQiuX, et al.
An instant multi-responsive porous polymer actuator driven by solvent molecule sorption. Nat Commun2014;
5: 4293.
86.
BahramzadehYShahinpoorM.A review of ionic polymeric soft actuators and sensors. Soft Robot2013;
1: 38–52.
87.
YangYChiangKBurkeN.Porous carbon-supported catalysts for energy and environmental applications: a short review. Catal Today2011;
178: 197–205.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
