Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is emerging as a promising technique for manufacturing bioresorbable stents (BRS), particularly for coronary artery disease treatment. Polycaprolactone (PCL) has emerged as a favored material due to its biocompatibility, controlled degradation rate and mechanical properties. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the effects of key FDM printing parameters on the quality aspects of PCL-based BRS, focusing on morphological, mechanical and biological characteristics. This review also highlights inconsistencies in previous studies, particularly in the impact of these parameters on stent dimensions and mechanical properties, emphasizing the need for standardization in experimental methodologies. Additionally, the current gaps in research related to the mechanical and biological performances of PCL-based BRS are discussed, with a call for further studies on long-term effects. This review aims to guide future research by offering insights into optimizing FDM parameters for improving the overall performance and clinical outcomes of PCL-based BRS.
MiuraTMiyashitaYHozawaK, et al.Cilostazol effectiveness in reducing drug-coated stent restenosis in the superficial femoral artery: the ZERO study. PLoS One2022; 17: e0270992.
8.
WalseRSMohanan NairKKValaparambilA, et al.Natural history of coronary stents: 14 year follow-up of drug eluting stents versus bare metal stents. Indian Heart J2023; 75: 457–461.
9.
AhadiFAzadiMBiglariM, et al.Evaluation of coronary stents: a review of types, materials, processing techniques, design, and problems. Heliyon2023; 9: e13575.
10.
ZhangXGuoZZhuL, et al.Challenges and chances coexist: a visualized analysis and bibliometric study of research on bioresorbable vascular scaffolds from 2000 to 2022. Medicine2023; 102: e33885.
11.
PolanecBKrambergerJGlodežS. A review of production technologies and materials for manufacturing of cardiovascular stents. Advances in Production Engineering And Management2020; 15: 390–402.
12.
SunXWeiXLiZ, et al.Investigating the influences of wet fiber laser cutting upon the surface integrity of nitinol cardiovascular stents. Int J Precis Eng Manuf2021; 22: 1237–1248.
13.
WangLJiaoLPangS, et al.The development of design and manufacture techniques for bioresorbable coronary artery stents. Micromachines2021; 12: 990.
14.
Szymczyk-ZiółkowskaPŁabowskaMBDetynaJ, et al.A review of fabrication polymer scaffolds for biomedical applications using additive manufacturing techniques. Biocybern Biomed Eng2020; 40: 624–638.
15.
JiangWZhaoWZhouT, et al.A review on manufacturing and post-processing technology of vascular stents. Micromachines2022; 13: 140.
16.
LiYShiYLuY, et al.Additive manufacturing of vascular stents. Acta Biomater2023; 167: 16–37.
17.
SheoranAJKumarH. Fused Deposition modeling process parameters optimization and effect on mechanical properties and part quality: review and reflection on present research. Mater Today Proc2020; 21: 1659–1672.
18.
KhanSJoshiKDeshmukhS. A comprehensive review on effect of printing parameters on mechanical properties of FDM printed parts. Mater Today Proc2021; 50: 2119–2127.
19.
KristiawanRBImaduddinFAriawanD, et al.A review on the fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing: filament processing, materials, and printing parameters. Open Eng2021; 11: 639–649.
20.
DoshiMMahaleASinghSK, et al.Printing parameters and materials affecting mechanical properties of FDM-3D printed parts: perspective and prospects. Mater Today Proc2021; 50: 2269–2275.
21.
BakhtiariHAamirMTolouei-RadM. Effect of 3D printing parameters on the fatigue properties of parts manufactured by fused filament fabrication: a review. Appl Sci2023; 13: 904.
22.
BouzaglouOGolanOLachmanN. Process design and parameters interaction in material extrusion 3D printing: a review. Polymers2023; 15: 2280.
23.
Elsonbaty AmiraAMrashadAAbass OmniaYY, et al.A survey of Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) technology in 3D printing. Journal of Engineering Research and Reports2024; 26: 304–312.
24.
KarimiARahmatabadiDBaghaniM. Various FDM mechanisms used in the fabrication of continuous-fiber reinforced composites: a review. Polymers2024; 16: 831.
25.
BartnikowskiMDargavilleTRIvanovskiS, et al.Degradation mechanisms of polycaprolactone in the context of chemistry, geometry and environment. Prog Polym Sci2019; 96: 1–20.
26.
Garcia-VillenFLópez-ZárragaFViserasC, et al.Three-dimensional printing as a cutting-edge, versatile and personalizable vascular stent manufacturing procedure: toward tailor-made medical devices. Int J Bioprint2023; 9: 664.
27.
ZhaiYZhangHWangJ, et al.Research progress of metal-based additive manufacturing in medical implants. Rev Adv Mater Sci2023; 62: 20230148.
28.
YasminFVafadarATolouei-RadM. Application of additive manufacturing in the development of polymeric bioresorbable cardiovascular stents: a review. Adv Mater Technol2025; 10: 2400210.
29.
LiWWangMMaH, et al.Stereolithography apparatus and digital light processing-based 3D bioprinting for tissue fabrication. iScience2023; 26: 106039.
30.
HuangJQinQWangJ. A review of stereolithography: processes and systems. Processes2020; 8: 1138.
31.
CarveMWlodkowicD. 3D-Printed chips: compatibility of additive manufacturing photopolymeric substrata with biological applications. Micromachines2018; 9: 91.
32.
BracagliaLGSmithBTWatsonE, et al.3D printing for the design and fabrication of polymer-based gradient scaffolds. Acta Biomater2017; 56: 3–13.
33.
NgoTDKashaniAImbalzanoG, et al.Additive manufacturing (3D printing): a review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Compos B Eng2018; 143: 172–196.
34.
YuanLDingSWenC. Additive manufacturing technology for porous metal implant applications and triple minimal surface structures: a review. Bioact Mater2019; 4: 56–70.
35.
ZhuJSuZWangQ, et al.Process parameter effects estimation and surface quality prediction for selective laser melting empowered by Bayes optimized soft attention mechanism-enhanced transfer learning. Comput Ind2024; 156: 104066.
36.
AbbasiMVázPSilvaJ, et al.Head-to-Head evaluation of FDM and SLA in additive manufacturing: performance, cost, and environmental perspectives. Appl Sci2025; 15: 2245.
37.
SousaAMAmaroAMPiedadeAP. 3D printing of polymeric bioresorbable stents: a strategy to improve both cellular compatibility and mechanical properties. Polymers2022; 14: 1099.
38.
VeerubhotlaKLeeYLeeCH. Parametric optimization of 3D printed hydrogel-based cardiovascular stent. Pharm Res2021; 38: 885–900.
39.
VeerubhotlaKLeeCH. Design of biodegradable 3D-printed cardiovascular stent. Bioprinting2022; 26: e00204.
40.
VeerubhotlaKMcGrawHLeeCH. Assessment of biocompatibility of 3D-printed cardiovascular stent. Adv Ther2023; 6: 2200292.
41.
AhadiFAzadiMBiglariM, et al.Topology optimization of coronary artery stent considering structural and hemodynamic parameters. Heliyon2024; 10: e39452.
42.
SousaAMAmaroAMPiedadeAP. Structural design optimization through finite element analysis of additive manufactured bioresorbable polymeric stents. Mater Today Chem2024; 36: 101972.
43.
BraconnierDJJensenREPetersonAM. Processing parameter correlations in material extrusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2020; 31: 100924.
44.
DeyAYodoN. A systematic survey of FDM process parameter optimization and their influence on part characteristics. J Manuf Mater Process2019; 3: 64.
45.
SolomonIJSevvelPGunasekaranJ. A review on the various processing parameters in FDM. Mater Today Proc2020; 37: 509–514.
46.
WangPZouBDingS, et al.Effects of FDM-3D printing parameters on mechanical properties and microstructure of CF/PEEK and GF/PEEK. Chin J Aeronaut2021; 34: 236–246.
47.
CojocaruVFrunzaverdeDMiclosinaCO, et al.The influence of the process parameters on the mechanical properties of PLA specimens produced by fused filament fabrication—a review. Polymers2022; 14: 886.
48.
HuaWShiWMitchellK, et al.3D printing of biodegradable polymer vascular stents: a review. Chin J Mech Eng: Additive Manuf Frontiers2022; 1: 100020.
49.
JeshariSDie LoucouJLeboffeM, et al.Preoperative sizing to lower in-stent restenosis in peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Ann Vasc Surg2024; 106: 37–50.
50.
ChandrasekharJBaberUSartoriS, et al.Effect of increasing stent length on 3-year clinical outcomes in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with new-generation drug-eluting stents patient-level pooled analysis of randomized trials from the WIN-DES initiative. JACC Cardiovasc Interv2018; 11: 53–65.
51.
ShenXJiSDengYQ, et al.Tissue stresses in stented coronary arteries with different geometries: effect of the relation between stent length and lesion length. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Mech Eng2019; 43: 957–964.
52.
ChenYGaoYFWangYF, et al.Influence of stent length on periprocedural outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Clin Interv Aging2022; 17: 1687–1695.
53.
NakataniSNishinoMTaniikeM, et al.Initial findings of impact of strut width on stent coverage and apposition of sirolimus-eluting stents assessed by optical coherence tomography. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv2013; 81: 776–781.
SaitoADaiZOnoM, et al.The relationship between coronary stent strut thickness and the incidences of clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv2022; 99: 575–582.
56.
CaiSWuCYangW, et al.Recent advance in surface modification for regulating cell adhesion and behaviors. Nanotechnol Rev2020; 9: 971–989.
57.
HanJLiZSunY, et al.Surface roughness and biocompatibility of polycaprolactone bone scaffolds: an energy-density-guided parameter optimization for selective laser sintering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2022; 10: 888267.
58.
PauckRGReddyBD. Computational analysis of the radial mechanical performance of PLLA coronary artery stents. Med Eng Phys2015; 37: 7–12.
59.
BorhaniSHassanajiliSAhmadi TaftiSH, et al.Cardiovascular stents: overview, evolution, and next generation. Prog Biomater2018; 7: 175–205.
60.
RuanXYuanWHuY, et al.Chiral constrained stent: effect of structural design on the mechanical and intravascular stent deployment performances. Mech Mater2020; 148: 103509.
61.
BinkNMohanVBFakirovS. Recent advances in plastic stents: a comprehensive review. International Journal of Polymeric Materials and Polymeric Biomaterials2021; 70: 54–74.
KoreiNSoloukAHaghbin NazarpakM, et al.A review on design characteristics and fabrication methods of metallic cardiovascular stents. Mater Today Commun2022; 31: 103467.
ChichareonPKatagiriYAsanoT, et al.Mechanical properties and performances of contemporary drug-eluting stent: focus on the metallic backbone. Expet Rev Med Dev2019; 16: 211–228.
66.
GuanYLinJDongZ, et al. Comparative study of the effect of structural parameters on the flexibility of endovascular stent grafts. Adv Mater Sci Eng. 2018; 1: 3046576.
67.
McMahonSBertolloNCearbhaillEDO, et al.Bio-resorbable polymer stents: a review of material progress and prospects. Prog Polym Sci2018; 83: 79–96.
68.
HuTYangCLinS, et al.Biodegradable stents for coronary artery disease treatment: recent advances and future perspectives. Mater Sci Eng C2018; 91: 163–178.
69.
JurakMWiącekAEŁadniakA, et al.What affects the biocompatibility of polymers?Adv Colloid Interface Sci2021; 294: 102451.
70.
HosseinpourSGaudinAPetersOA. A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study biocompatibility of endodontic materials. Int Endod J2022; 55: 346–369.
71.
BandyopadhyayAMitraIGoodmanSB, et al.Improving biocompatibility for next generation of metallic implants. Prog Mater Sci2023; 133: 101053.
72.
FonsecaDAPaulaABMartoCM, et al.Biocompatibility of root canal sealers: a systematic review of in vitro and in vivo studies. Materials2019; 12: 1–34.
73.
RautHKDasRLiuZ, et al.Biocompatibility of biomaterials for tissue regeneration or replacement. Biotechnol J2020; 15: e2000160.
74.
YuanYAbeykoonCMirihanageW, et al.Prediction of temperature and crystal growth evolution during 3D printing of polymeric materials via extrusion. Mater Des2020; 196: 109121.
75.
SchiavoneNVerneyVAskanianH. Effect of 3D printing temperature profile on polymer materials behavior. 3D Print Addit Manuf2020; 7: 311–325.
76.
BattistelliCSerianiSLughiV, et al.Optimizing 3D-printing parameters for enhanced mechanical properties in liquid crystalline polymer components. Polym Adv Technol2024; 35: e70037.
77.
Buj-CorralIBagheriASivatte-AdroerM. Effect of printing parameters on dimensional error, surface roughness and porosity of FFF printed parts with grid structure. Polymers2021; 13: 1213.
78.
GuerraAJCiuranaJ. 3D-printed bioabsordable polycaprolactone stent: the effect of process parameters on its physical features. Mater Des2018; 137: 430–437.
79.
KanakYSinghPSinghP, et al.Photocatalytic degradation of malachite green using PVDF membranes doped with Fe3O4 nanoparticles: role of porosity and surface roughness. Phys Scri2023; 98: 105953.
80.
RosliNAKaramanliogluMKargarzadehH, et al.Comprehensive exploration of natural degradation of poly(lactic acid) blends in various degradation media: a review. Int J Biol Macromol2021; 187: 732–741.
81.
LiuYLuBCaiZ. Recent progress on Mg- and Zn-based alloys for biodegradable vascular stent applications. J Nanomater2019; 2019: 1–16.
82.
ZongJHeQLiuY, et al.Advances in the development of biodegradable coronary stents: a translational perspective. Mater Today Bio2022; 16: 100368.
QiuTJiangWYanP, et al.Development of 3D-printed sulfated chitosan modified bioresorbable stents for coronary artery disease. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2020; 8: 462.
85.
FoinNLeeRDToriiR, et al.Impact of stent strut design in metallic stents and biodegradable scaffolds. Int J Cardiol2014; 177: 800–808.
86.
BowenPKShearierERZhaoS, et al.Biodegradable metals for cardiovascular stents: from clinical concerns to recent Zn-alloys. Adv Healthcare Mater2016; 5: 1121–1140.
87.
AngHYHuangYYLimST, et al.Mechanical behavior of polymer-based vs. metallic-based bioresorbable stents. J Thorac Dis2017; 9: S923–S934.
88.
ShiZ-ZGaoX-XZhangH-J, et al.Design biodegradable Zn alloys: second phases and their significant influences on alloy properties. Bioact Mater2020; 5: 210–218.
89.
VishnuJManivasagamGMantovaniD, et al.Balloon expandable coronary stent materials: a systematic review focused on clinical success. Vitro Models2022; 1: 151–175.
90.
ZhangYRouxCRouchaudA, et al.Recent advances in Fe-based bioresorbable stents: materials design and biosafety. Bioact Mater2024; 31: 333–354.
91.
ChenZZhangXFuY, et al.Degradation behaviors of polylactic acid, polyglycolic acid, and their copolymer films in simulated marine environments. Polymers2024; 16: 1765.
92.
SungH-JMeredithCJohnsonC, et al.The effect of scaffold degradation rate on three-dimensional cell growth and angiogenesis. Biomaterials2004; 25: 5735–5742.
93.
Emily WalkerMH. Magnesium, iron and zinc alloys, the trifecta of bioresorbable orthopaedic and vascular implantation - a review. J Biotechnol Biomater2015; 05: 05.
94.
DomingosMChielliniFGloriaA, et al.Effect of process parameters on the morphological and mechanical properties of 3D Bioextruded poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds. Rapid Prototyp J2012; 18: 56–67.
95.
KochFThadenOConradS, et al.Mechanical properties of polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds for hybrid 3D-bioprinting with alginate-gelatin hydrogel. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2022; 130: 105219.
96.
SongGZhaoHQLiuQ, et al.A review on biodegradable biliary stents: materials and future trends. Bioact Mater2022; 17: 488–495.
97.
GharleghiRWrightHLuvioV, et al.A multi-objective optimization of stent geometries. J Biomech2021; 125: 110575.
98.
SachanRWarkarSGPurwarR. An overview on synthesis, properties and applications of polycaprolactone copolymers, blends & composites. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Materials2023; 62: 327–358.
99.
GuerraARocaAde CiuranaJ. A novel 3D additive manufacturing machine to biodegradable stents. Procedia Manuf2017; 13: 718–723.
100.
SinghJSinghGPandeyPM. Multi-objective optimization of solvent cast 3D printing process parameters for fabrication of biodegradable composite stents. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2021; 115: 3945–3964.
101.
WangCZhangLFangY, et al.Design, characterization, and 3D printing of cardiovascular stents with zero Poisson’s ratio in longitudinal deformation. Engineering2021; 7: 979–990.
102.
KandiRPandeyPM. Statistical modelling and optimization of print quality and mechanical properties of customized tubular scaffolds fabricated using solvent-based extrusion 3D printing process. Proc Inst Mech Eng H2021; 235: 1421–1438.
103.
BaradaranYBaghaniMKazempourM, et al. Design and shape optimization of a biodegradable polymeric stent for curved arteries using FEM. Front Mech Eng. 2021; 7: 689002.
104.
TeongYWMustaphaKBIbitoyeMO. Finite element analysis and surrogate-optimized design of a nature-inspired auxetic stent. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2024: 1–17.
105.
FerreiraJGloriaACometaS, et al.Effect of in vitro enzymatic degradation on 3D printed poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds: morphological, chemical and mechanical properties. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater2017; 15: e185–e195.
106.
ChenFEkinciALiL, et al.How do the printing parameters of fused filament fabrication and structural voids influence the degradation of biodegradable devices?Acta Biomater2021; 136: 254–265.
107.
GuerraAJCiuranaJD. Three-dimensional tubular printing of bioabsorbable stents: the effects process parameters have on in vitro degradation. 3D Print Addit Manuf2019; 6: 50–56.
108.
GuerraAJCanoPRabionetM, et al.3D-printed PCL/PLA composite stents: towards a new solution to cardiovascular problems. Materials2018; 11.
109.
ZhaoJFengY. Surface engineering of cardiovascular devices for improved hemocompatibility and rapid endothelialization. Adv Healthcare Mater2020; 9: e2000920.
110.
YuCGuanGGlasS, et al.A biomimetic basement membrane consisted of hybrid aligned nanofibers and microfibers with immobilized collagen IV and laminin for rapid endothelialization. Biodes Manuf2021; 4: 171–189.
111.
MatschegewskiCKohseSMarkhoffJ, et al.Accelerated endothelialization of nanofibrous scaffolds for biomimetic cardiovascular implants. Materials2022; 15: 2014.
112.
VSSPVM. Degradation of Poly(ε-caprolactone) and bio-interactions with mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2018; 163: 107–118.
113.
SurendranDKumar R SSGeethaCS, et al.Long term effect of biodegradable polymer on oxidative. Bio2012; 2: 37–46.
114.
GengPZhaoJWuW, et al.Effects of extrusion speed and printing speed on the 3D printing stability of extruded PEEK filament. J Manuf Process2019; 37: 266–273.
115.
SoufivandAAAbolfathiNHashemiA, et al.The effect of 3D printing on the morphological and mechanical properties of polycaprolactone filament and scaffold. Polym Adv Technol2020; 31: 1038–1046.
116.
AlhijjajMNasereddinJBeltonP, et al.Impact of processing parameters on the quality of pharmaceutical solid dosage forms produced by fused deposition modeling (FDM). Pharmaceutics2019; 11: 633.
117.
SinghJPandeyPMKaurT, et al.A comparative analysis of solvent cast 3D printed carbonyl iron powder reinforced polycaprolactone polymeric stents for intravascular applications. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2021; 109: 1344–1359.
118.
SinghJPandeyPMKaurT, et al.Effect of heparin drug loading on biodegradable polycaprolactone–iron pentacarbonyl powder blend stents fabricated by solvent cast 3D printing. Rapid Prototyp J2022; 28: 1361–1373.
119.
ShenYTangCSunB, et al.3D printed personalized, heparinized and biodegradable coronary artery stents for rabbit abdominal aorta implantation. Chem Eng J2022; 450: 138202.
120.
ParkSALeeSJLimKS, et al.In vivo evaluation and characterization of a bio-absorbable drug-coated stent fabricated using a 3D-printing system. Mater Lett2015; 141: 355–358.
121.
LiangH-YLeeW-KHsuJ-T, et al.Polycaprolactone in bone tissue engineering: a comprehensive review of innovations in Scaffold fabrication and surface modifications. J Funct Biomater2024; 15: 243.
122.
KhanMAKhanNUllahM, et al.3D printing technology and its revolutionary role in stent implementation in cardiovascular disease. Curr Probl Cardiol2024; 49: 102568.
123.
WuL-NZhangZ-FLiR-J, et al.3D printing for personalized solutions in cervical spondylosis. Orthop Res Rev2024; 16: 251–259.
