Skeletal tissues possess complicated structures and thereby their regeneration confronts considerable challenges. The final objective of skeletal tissue engineering is the development of efficient engineered substitutes in order to promote tissue regeneration. Numerous efforts have been made to develop functional biomimetic constructs with superior functions and characteristics to create advanced biomaterials for skeletal regeneration. One of the efficient approaches for designing bioinspired materials is mimicking the microstructure and architecture of natural living organisms and applying them in developing biomaterials with relevant functionality. Moreover, bioinspired complex structures which are developed by mimicking natural or synthetic architectures provide a crucial role in tissue engineering. Since the traditional approaches can not fulfill the demands to design intricate biomimetic materials, employing novel technologies may be satisfying. 3D bioprinting is a rapidly evolving technology which offers accurate multi-material and multi-scale manufacturing of biomimetic constructs for the patient-specific tissue regeneration. Numerous attempts such as mimicking the hierarchical structure and function of bone tissue, resembling the zonal architecture of cartilage tissue and imitating the microstructure and mechanical characteristics of natural osteochondral tissue, can suggest clinically desirable candidates for skeletal reconstruction. Here, 3D bioprinting technology for creating bioinspired constructs for use in skeletal tissue regeneration is discussed. We review various types of bioinspired constructs developed by mimicking the endogenous structure and function of skeletal tissues. Next, biomimetic constructs that are designed by imitating other natural and synthetic structures are discussed. Clinical trials utilizing 3D-printed constructs for skeletal tissue regeneration is discussed as the final part of the story. Different strategies such as mimicking strong adhesion to different surfaces, imitating the morphology of different architectures and resembling the hierarchical structure of natural and synthetic structures can expand the opportunity to develop realistic and effective constructs for clinical regeneration of skeletal tissue.
MarzinPCormier-DaireV. New perspectives on the treatment of skeletal dysplasia. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab2020; 11: 2042018820904016.
2.
RosetiLDesandoGCavalloC, et al.Articular cartilage regeneration in osteoarthritis. Cells2019; 8: 1305.
3.
ElgaliIOmarODahlinC, et al.Guided bone regeneration: materials and biological mechanisms revisited. Eur J Oral Sci2017; 125: 315–337.
4.
HowellMLiaoQGeeCW. Surgical management of osteochondral defects of the knee: an educational review. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med2021; 14: 60–66.
5.
ArmientoAStoddartMAliniM, et al.Biomaterials for articular cartilage tissue engineering: learning from biology. Acta Biomater2018; 65: 1–20.
6.
MataiIKaurGSeyedsalehiA, et al.Progress in 3D bioprinting technology for tissue/organ regenerative engineering. Biomaterials2020; 226: 119536.
7.
AshammakhiNAhadianSXuC, et al.Bioinks and bioprinting technologies to make heterogeneous and biomimetic tissue constructs. Mater Today Bio2019; 1: 100008.
8.
XiangTHouJXieH, et al.Biomimetic micro/nano structures for biomedical applications. Nano Today2020; 35: 100980.
9.
LiTChangJZhuY, et al.3D printing of bioinspired biomaterials for tissue regeneration. Adv Healthcare Mater2020; 9: 2000208.
10.
WangDChenDChenZ. Recent progress in 3D printing of bioinspired structures. Front Mater2020; 7: 286.
11.
Lafuente-MerchanMRuiz-AlonsoSGarcía-VillénF, et al.Progress in 3D bioprinting technology for osteochondral regeneration. Pharmaceutics2022; 14: 1578.
12.
HuSYiYYeC, et al.Advances in 3D printing techniques for cartilage regeneration of temporomandibular joint disc and mandibular condyle. Int J Bioprint2023; 9: 761.
13.
LiuJLiLSuoH, et al.3D printing of biomimetic multi-layered GelMA/nHA scaffold for osteochondral defect repair. Mater Des2019; 171: 107708.
14.
GuoJLDiaz-GomezLXieVY, et al.Three-dimensional printing of click functionalized, peptide patterned scaffolds for osteochondral tissue engineering. Bioprinting2021; 22: e00136.
15.
RathanSDejobLSchipaniR, et al.Fiber reinforced cartilage ECM functionalized bioinks for functional cartilage tissue engineering. Adv Healthcare Mater2019; 8: 1801501.
16.
AntichCde VicenteJJiménezG, et al.Bio-inspired hydrogel composed of hyaluronic acid and alginate as a potential bioink for 3D bioprinting of articular cartilage engineering constructs. Acta Biomater2020; 106: 114–123.
17.
GongLLiJZhangJ, et al.An interleukin-4-loaded bi-layer 3D printed scaffold promotes osteochondral regeneration. Acta Biomater2020; 117: 246–260.
18.
ZhangBWangLSongP, et al.3D printed bone tissue regenerative PLA/HA scaffolds with comprehensive performance optimizations. Mater Des2021; 201: 109490.
19.
IdaszekJCostantiniMKarlsenTA, et al.3D bioprinting of hydrogel constructs with cell and material gradients for the regeneration of full-thickness chondral defect using a microfluidic printing head. Biofabrication2019; 11: 044101.
20.
FengCZhangWDengC, et al.3D printing of lotus root‐like biomimetic materials for cell delivery and tissue regeneration. Adv Sci2017; 4: 1700401.
21.
MarkstedtKMantasATournierI, et al.3D bioprinting human chondrocytes with nanocellulose–alginate bioink for cartilage tissue engineering applications. Biomacromolecules2015; 16: 1489–1496.
22.
ÁvilaHMSchwarzSRotterN, et al.3D bioprinting of human chondrocyte-laden nanocellulose hydrogels for patient-specific auricular cartilage regeneration. Bioprinting2016; 1: 22–35.
23.
AyanBWuYKaruppagounderV, et al.Aspiration-assisted bioprinting of the osteochondral interface. Sci Rep2020; 10: 13148.
24.
LiLShiJMaK, et al.Robotic in situ 3D bio-printing technology for repairing large segmental bone defects. J Adv Res2021; 30: 75–84.
25.
MaKZhaoTYangL, et al.Application of robotic-assisted in situ 3D printing in cartilage regeneration with HAMA hydrogel: an in vivo study. J Adv Res2020; 23: 123–132.
26.
CastroNJO'brienJZhangLG. Integrating biologically inspired nanomaterials and table-top stereolithography for 3D printed biomimetic osteochondral scaffolds. Nanoscale2015; 7: 14010–14022.
27.
MondalDHaghpanahZHuxmanCJ, et al.mSLA-based 3D printing of acrylated epoxidized soybean oil-nano-hydroxyapatite composites for bone repair. Mater Sci Eng C2021; 130: 112456.
28.
HongHSeoYBKimDY, et al.Digital light processing 3D printed silk fibroin hydrogel for cartilage tissue engineering. Biomaterials2020; 232: 119679.
29.
WangYWangZYuX, et al.3D-Printing of succulent plant-like scaffolds with beneficial cell microenvironments for bone regeneration. J Mater Chem B2023; 11: 5523–5536.
30.
ZhangLWangBSongB, et al.3D printed biomimetic metamaterials with graded porosity and tapering topology for improved cell seeding and bone regeneration. Bioact Mater2023; 25: 677–688.
31.
MazzoliAFerrettiCGiganteA, et al.Selective laser sintering manufacturing of polycaprolactone bone scaffolds for applications in bone tissue engineering. Rapid Prototyp J2015; 21: 386–392.
32.
DuanBCheungWLWangM. Optimized fabrication of Ca–P/PHBV nanocomposite scaffolds via selective laser sintering for bone tissue engineering. Biofabrication2011; 3: 015001.
33.
LiTPengZLvQ, et al. SLS 3D printing to fabricate poly (vinyl alcohol)/hydroxyapatite bioactive composite porous scaffolds and their bone defect repair property. ACS Biomater Sci Eng2023; 9: 6734.
34.
QiaoZLianMHanY, et al.Bioinspired stratified electrowritten fiber-reinforced hydrogel constructs with layer-specific induction capacity for functional osteochondral regeneration. Biomaterials2021; 266: 120385.
35.
HanYLianMSunB, et al.Preparation of high precision multilayer scaffolds based on Melt Electro-Writing to repair cartilage injury. Theranostics2020; 10: 10214–10230.
36.
YangYChenZSongX, et al. Biomimetic anisotropic reinforcement architectures by electrically assisted nanocomposite 3D printing. Adv Mater2017; 29: 1605750.
37.
WangYLingCChenJ, et al.3D-printed composite scaffold with gradient structure and programmed biomolecule delivery to guide stem cell behavior for osteochondral regeneration. Biomater Adv2022; 140: 213067.
38.
SteeleJAMooreACSt-PierreJ-P, et al.In vitro and in vivo investigation of a zonal microstructured scaffold for osteochondral defect repair. Biomaterials2022; 286: 121548.
39.
LawlorKTVanslambrouckJMHigginsJW, et al.Cellular extrusion bioprinting improves kidney organoid reproducibility and conformation. Nat Mater2021; 20: 260–271.
40.
KyleSJessopZMAl‐SabahA, et al.Printability'of candidate biomaterials for extrusion based 3D printing: state‐of‐the‐art. Adv Healthcare Mater2017; 6: 1700264.
LuponeFPadovanoECasamentoF, et al.Process phenomena and material properties in selective laser sintering of polymers: a review. Materials2021; 15: 183.
43.
YuanLDingSWenC. Additive manufacturing technology for porous metal implant applications and triple minimal surface structures: a review. Bioact Mater2019; 4: 56–70.
44.
KumarHSakthivelKMohamedMG, et al.Designing gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA)‐based bioinks for visible light stereolithographic 3D biofabrication. Macromol Biosci2021; 21: 2000317.
45.
BedellMLTorresALHoganKJ, et al.Human gelatin-based composite hydrogels for osteochondral tissue engineering and their adaptation into bioinks for extrusion, inkjet, and digital light processing bioprinting. Biofabrication2022; 14: 045012.
46.
HuangGLiFZhaoX, et al.Functional and biomimetic materials for engineering of the three-dimensional cell microenvironment. Chem Rev2017; 117: 12764–12850.
47.
MaHFengCChangJ, et al.3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds: from bone tissue engineering to tumor therapy. Acta Biomater2018; 79: 37–59.
48.
DongXLiHZhouY, et al.The stimulation of osteogenic differentiation of embryoid bodies from human induced pluripotent stem cells by akermanite bioceramics. J Mater Chem B2016; 4: 2369–2376.
49.
ZhangMLinRWangX, et al.3D printing of Haversian bone–mimicking scaffolds for multicellular delivery in bone regeneration. Sci Adv2020; 6: eaaz6725.
50.
MaLWangXZhouY, et al.Biomimetic Ti–6Al–4V alloy/gelatin methacrylate hybrid scaffold with enhanced osteogenic and angiogenic capabilities for large bone defect restoration. Bioact Mater2021; 6: 3437–3448.
51.
PeiXWangLZhouC, et al.Ti6Al4V orthopedic implant with biomimetic heterogeneous structure via 3D printing for improving osteogenesis. Mater Des2022; 221: 110964.
52.
LiuBLiJLeiX, et al.3D-bioprinted functional and biomimetic hydrogel scaffolds incorporated with nanosilicates to promote bone healing in rat calvarial defect model. Mater Sci Eng C2020; 112: 110905.
53.
ZhangJEyisoyluHQinX-H, et al.3D bioprinting of graphene oxide-incorporated cell-laden bone mimicking scaffolds for promoting scaffold fidelity, osteogenic differentiation and mineralization. Acta Biomater2021; 121: 637–652.
54.
NagelTKellyDJ. The composition of engineered cartilage at the time of implantation determines the likelihood of regenerating tissue with a normal collagen architecture. Tissue Eng2013; 19: 824–833.
55.
RenXWangFChenC, et al.Engineering zonal cartilage through bioprinting collagen type II hydrogel constructs with biomimetic chondrocyte density gradient. BMC Muscoskelet Disord2016; 17: 301–310.
56.
LevatoRWebbWROttoIA, et al.The bio in the ink: cartilage regeneration with bioprintable hydrogels and articular cartilage-derived progenitor cells. Acta Biomater2017; 61: 41–53.
57.
CastilhoMMouserVChenM, et al.Bi-layered micro-fibre reinforced hydrogels for articular cartilage regeneration. Acta Biomater2019; 95: 297–306.
58.
DuYLiuHYangQ, et al.Selective laser sintering scaffold with hierarchical architecture and gradient composition for osteochondral repair in rabbits. Biomaterials2017; 137: 37–48.
59.
NukavarapuSPDorcemusDL. Osteochondral tissue engineering: current strategies and challenges. Biotechnol Adv2013; 31: 706–721.
60.
GaoFXuZLiangQ, et al.Direct 3D printing of high strength biohybrid gradient hydrogel scaffolds for efficient repair of osteochondral defect. Adv Funct Mater2018; 28: 1706644.
61.
GaoFXuZLiangQ, et al.Osteochondral regeneration with 3D‐printed biodegradable high‐strength supramolecular polymer reinforced‐gelatin hydrogel scaffolds. Adv Sci2019; 6: 1900867.
62.
SiddiqueSHHazellPJWangH, et al.Lessons from nature: 3D printed bio-inspired porous structures for impact energy absorption–A review. Addit Manuf2022; 58: 103051.
63.
MaHLuoJSunZ, et al.3D printing of biomaterials with mussel-inspired nanostructures for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration. Biomaterials2016; 111: 138–148.
64.
GhoraiSKDuttaARoyT, et al.Metal ion augmented mussel inspired polydopamine immobilized 3D printed osteoconductive scaffolds for accelerated bone tissue regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2022; 14: 28455–28475.
65.
JiangYPanXYaoM, et al.Bioinspired adhesive and tumor microenvironment responsive nanoMOFs assembled 3D-printed scaffold for anti-tumor therapy and bone regeneration. Nano Today2021; 39: 101182.
66.
HoC-CChenY-WWangK, et al.Effect of mussel-inspired polydopamine on the reinforced properties of 3D printed β-tricalcium phosphate/polycaprolactone scaffolds for bone regeneration. J Mater Chem B2023; 11: 72–82.
67.
DengTGaoDSongX, et al.A natural biological adhesive from snail mucus for wound repair. Nat Commun2023; 14: 396.
68.
FengBZhangMQinC, et al.3D printing of conch-like scaffolds for guiding cell migration and directional bone growth. Bioact Mater2023; 22: 127–140.
69.
LiuKLiWChenS, et al.The design, fabrication and evaluation of 3D printed gHNTs/gMgO whiskers/PLLA composite scaffold with honeycomb microstructure for bone tissue engineering. Compos B Eng2020; 192: 108001.
70.
ZhouXTenaglioSEsworthyT, et al.Three-dimensional printing biologically inspired DNA-based gradient scaffolds for cartilage tissue regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2020; 12: 33219–33228.
71.
GuoWXuHLiuD, et al.3D-printed lattice-inspired composites for bone reconstruction. J Mater Chem B2023; 11: 7353–7363.
72.
ChenQZouBLaiQ, et al.3D printing and osteogenesis of loofah-like hydroxyapatite bone scaffolds. Ceram Int2021; 47: 20352–20361.
73.
YangZXueJLiT, et al.3D printing of sponge spicules-inspired flexible bioceramic-based scaffolds. Biofabrication2022; 14: 035009.
74.
LiTZhaiDMaB, et al.3D printing of hot dog-like biomaterials with hierarchical architecture and distinct bioactivity. Adv Sci2019; 6: 1901146.
75.
ZhaoRShangTYuanB, et al.Osteoporotic bone recovery by a bamboo-structured bioceramic with controlled release of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles. Bioact Mater2022; 17: 379–393.
76.
WangXYuYYangC, et al.Microfluidic 3D printing responsive scaffolds with biomimetic enrichment channels for bone regeneration. Adv Funct Mater2021; 31: 2105190.
77.
TianYMaHYuX, et al. Biological response of 3D-printedβ-tricalcium phosphate bioceramic scaffolds with the hollow tube structure. Biomed Mater2023; 18: 034102.
78.
ZhaoZShenSLiM, et al.Three-dimensional printed titanium mesh combined with iliac cancellous bone in the reconstruction of mandibular defects secondary to ameloblastoma resection. BMC Oral Health2023; 23: 681.
79.
SumidaTOtawaNKamataY, et al.Custom-made titanium devices as membranes for bone augmentation in implant treatment: clinical application and the comparison with conventional titanium mesh. J Craniomaxillofac Surg2015; 43: 2183–2188.
80.
ParkE-KLimJ-YYunI-S, et al.Cranioplasty enhanced by three-dimensional printing: custom-made three-dimensional-printed titanium implants for skull defects. J Craniofac Surg2016; 27: 943–949.
81.
BrieJChartierTChaputC, et al.A new custom made bioceramic implant for the repair of large and complex craniofacial bone defects. J Craniomaxillofac Surg2013; 41: 403–407.
82.
SaijoHIgawaKKannoY, et al.Maxillofacial reconstruction using custom-made artificial bones fabricated by inkjet printing technology. J Artif Organs2009; 12: 200–205.
83.
GohBTTehLYTanDBP, et al.Novel 3 D polycaprolactone scaffold for ridge preservation–a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res2015; 26: 271–277.
84.
KeriquelVOliveiraHRémyM, et al.In situ printing of mesenchymal stromal cells, by laser-assisted bioprinting, for in vivo bone regeneration applications. Sci Rep2017; 7: 1778.
85.
LipskasJDeepKYaoW. Robotic-assisted 3D bio-printing for repairing bone and cartilage defects through a minimally invasive approach. Sci Rep2019; 9: 3746.
86.
Di BellaCDuchiSO'ConnellCD, et al.In situ handheld three‐dimensional bioprinting for cartilage regeneration. J Tissue Eng Regen Med2018; 12: 611–621.
87.
ZhangQZhouJZhiP, et al.3D printing method for bone tissue engineering scaffold. Medicine in Novel Technology and Devices2023; 17: 100205.
88.
GilbertFO’ConnellCDMladenovskaT, et al.Print me an organ? Ethical and regulatory issues emerging from 3D bioprinting in medicine. Sci Eng Ethics2018; 24: 73–91.
89.
GhahriTSalehiZAghajanpourS, et al.Development of osteon-like scaffold-cell construct by quadruple coaxial extrusion-based 3D bioprinting of nanocomposite hydrogel. Biomater Adv2023; 145: 213254.
90.
ZhouYQinRChenT, et al.3D bioprinting modified autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) technique for repair of cartilage defects. Mater Des2021; 203: 109621.
91.
HuGLiangZFanZ, et al.Construction of 3D-Bioprinted cartilage-mimicking substitute based on photo-crosslinkable Wharton's jelly bioinks for full-thickness articular cartilage defect repair. Mater Today Bio2023; 21: 100695.
92.
ChenMFengZGuoW, et al.PCL-MECM-based hydrogel hybrid scaffolds and meniscal fibrochondrocytes promote whole meniscus regeneration in a rabbit meniscectomy model. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2019; 11: 41626–41639.
93.
NultyJFreemanFEBroweDC, et al.3D bioprinting of prevascularised implants for the repair of critically-sized bone defects. Acta Biomater2021; 126: 154–169.
94.
PitaccoPSadowskaJMO'BrienFJ, et al.3D bioprinting of cartilaginous templates for large bone defect healing. Acta Biomater2023; 156: 61–74.
95.
ShenJSongWLiuJ, et al.3D bioprinting by reinforced bioink based on photocurable interpenetrating networks for cartilage tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol2024; 254: 127671.
96.
HuaS-BYuanXWuJ-M, et al.Digital light processing porous TPMS structural HA & akermanite bioceramics with optimized performance for cancellous bone repair. Ceram Int2022; 48: 3020–3029.
97.
RenXWangJWuY, et al.One-pot synthesis of hydroxyapatite hybrid bioinks for digital light processing 3D printing in bone regeneration. J Mater Sci Technol2024; 188: 84–97.
98.
WangJDaiXPengY, et al.Digital light processing strength-strong ultra-thin bioceramic scaffolds for challengeable orbital bone regeneration and repair in Situ. Appl Mater Today2021; 22: 100889.
99.
GuillaumeOGevenMAVarjasV, et al.Orbital floor repair using patient specific osteoinductive implant made by stereolithography. Biomaterials2020; 233: 119721.
100.
GuillaumeOGevenMSprecherC, et al.Surface-enrichment with hydroxyapatite nanoparticles in stereolithography-fabricated composite polymer scaffolds promotes bone repair. Acta Biomater2017; 54: 386–398.
101.
ZhouXEsworthyTLeeS-J, et al.3D Printed scaffolds with hierarchical biomimetic structure for osteochondral regeneration. Nanomedicine2019; 19: 58–70.
102.
WangZHuangCWangJ, et al.Design and characterization of hydroxyapatite scaffolds fabricated by stereolithography for bone tissue engineering application. Proced CIRP2020; 89: 170–175.
103.
Díaz LantadaAAlarcón IniestaHGarcía-RuízJP. Composite scaffolds for osteochondral repair obtained by combination of additive manufacturing, leaching processes and hMSC-CM functionalization. Mater Sci Eng C2016; 59: 218–227.
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.
