Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_980_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
UV source
lens
X-Y stage
a
b
Classication ofCutting-Edge Additive Manufacturing Techniques
https://t.me/medicina_free
65
X-Y stage
Glass
Resin
Mirror
Mirror
Oil
Z stage
Telescope
Objective
Stage
Galvanometric mirrors
c
UV source
Mirror
UV source
Lens Lens
Transparent glass
Resin
Resin
Lens
Resin
Mirror
Z stage
Z stage
d
fs laser
Galvanometric mirrors
Optical
system
Fig. 4 Stereolithography (SLA) processes; (a) SLA system with dynamic light beam, (b)
constrain- surface system, (c) free surface-system, (d) typical two photon polymerization(2PP) system [112]
Compared with other AM techniques, SLA-fabricated constructs have lower
mechanical strength and costly manufacturing procedure and may require more postfabricating measures [114]. Uncured resin remnants that may be left unwiped from
the structure can compromise their biocompatibility [115]. Given that SLA photocurable materials are not commonly degradable once polymerized, such constructs
may not be the most prime candidates in terms of tissue engineering. Designing supporting structures for SLA-manufactured 3D constructs must also be accounted for.
5.2 Employed Materials
The rst employed materials for SLA were based on acrylics and epoxies. Thereafter,
poly(propylene fumarate) (PPF) [116], trimethylene carbonate (TMC) copolymers
[117], and PEG [118] scaffolds were fabricated. Biodegradable constructs comprised of poly(,-lactide) resins, poly(,-lactide-co-Ɛ-caprolactone) resins, gelatin, or PCL methacrylate were also employed [119]. Vinyl ester-based resins offer
apt biocompatibility and allow development of medically applicable of SLAmanufactured constructs [120].
Unlike FDM, SLA enables employment of polymers, ceramics, and composite
materials when the working materials’ capacity for photopolymerization is yielding. Composites have higher viscosity compared with polymers. This hampers their
common use with FDM and perplex the fabrication procedure.
66
https://t.me/medicina_free
H. S. H. Boroojeni et al.
5.3 Clinical Application
Several genioplasty cases have been performed with SLA-fabricated surgical
guides. The investigators suggested that SLA-fabricated guides had signicantly
improved surgical accuracy [121, 122]. The studies wherein SLA-fabricated genio-
plasty guides were used had somewhat the same trajectory. At the designing stages,
accurate osteotomy positions and xating screw holes that were to be placed, determined the predened plan of guides. During the operation, once segmentations
were made, the repositioning guides were xated onto the mandible. Thereafter, the
chin is shifted in accordance to the guide holes and rigidly xated. The cutting
guides may be secured via occlusal forces or xation screws. Although there remain
certain contentions regarding whether prefabricated guides may reduce the duration
of genioplasty surgery, no varied incidence of complications has been reported following their use [123].
Nondegradable hydroxy apatite implants for cranial bone contouring or functional bone replacement purposes have been fabricated with SLA [124, 125]. Once
a HA/photosensitive resin implant is fabricated, the polymeric composition is heateradicated and the remnant pure HA sinters. A dimensional accuracy of beyond
0.4mm has been reported with this method [125].
5.4 Digital Light Processing
While the laser beam shifts in rows to form each layer in the traditional SLA technology, the addition of digital micromirror devices (DMD) to SLA systems has
altered their approach into digital light processing (DLP) [126, 127]. In DLP, the
patterns of each layer are formed upon a single projection. Numerous reective
shells are oriented to direct the projection rays onto surface of photosensitive resin
with regard to the predesigned patterns. The DLP systems are capable of more efcient and rapid manufacturing [128].
6 Selective Laser Sintering (SLS)
With selective laser sintering (SLS) or selective laser melting (SLM), scaffolds are
fabricated through prespecied fusion of material powder. A laser beam emits laser
in order to precisely melt/sinter the powders and fuse them. Material powder temperature is increased beyond their glass transition point [129]. The pathway, in
which the laser is emitted, is based upon a STL le input [130]. Upon fusion of each
layer, a platform is pushed downward in order for new unexposed powders to be
brought above using a mechanical roller. The procedure continues layer by layer
until the predesigned object is attained. The irradiated laser fuses the particles,
within each individual layer and between overlying layers, as well, to provide an
overall structural stability. The unexposed powders remain intact throughout the
procedure, leading to adequate support and stability of the printing product. CO2
Classication ofCutting-Edge Additive Manufacturing Techniques
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 5 Overview of Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA), and Selective
Laser Sintering (SLS) methods [131]
67
and neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) are the prevalently
employed laser types with the SLS trajectory [130] (Fig.5).
Four prominent binding mechanisms exist for SLS and SLM, including solid
sintering, liquid sintering, partial melting, and melting [132]. Solid sintering and
liquid sintering are mainly used for fabrication of ceramic and combined ceramicbinder constructs.
The pace of laser beam dictates scaffold porosity, powder layer thickness, laser
power, and the power transferred to material powders [133], indirectly impacting
the extent to which powders are fused. When no fusion has occurred, the highest
porosity rate is achieved, whereas thorough melting of adjacent powders, for
instance, in SLM, renders the least rates of porosity [134].
6.1 Prominent Features
SLS holds the advantage of an obviated necessity of printing supporting structures,
over SLA.This has been due to the stability that nonirradiated powders provide for
the gradually printed structure within them. Absence of supporting structures results
in skipping the post-fabrication trimming phase and leaves the removal of unaffected powders as the only post-fabrication manipulation [135]. However, SLS
offers compromised accuracy in comparison to SLA while still being among precise
68
https://t.me/medicina_free
AM methods with a relatively more control over microstructural properties of the
fabricated constructs [17, 114]. Compared with SLS, SLM provides higher functional accuracy [136]. SLS is weighed down due to difcult removal of powders and
high manufacturing temperatures. Popov etal. [137] proposed that through employing polymer particles coated with biocompatible carbon, the melting phenomena
can be conned to the outer coat solely, and the inner material is left untreated.
Their modications of SLS, known as selective laser sintering by surface, are candidate for developing growth factor-containing constructs.
H. S. H. Boroojeni et al.
6.2 Employed Materials
SLS systems can employ polymers, ceramics, metals, and composites for scaffold
fabrication. Of note, polymers and ceramics may evoke diverse reactions within
identical SLS setups. This has resulted in the necessity for production of polymerceramic composite granules prior to fabrication of composite scaffolds with SLS
printing [135]. For polymeric scaffolds, the printing environment is heated until the
temperature reaches just below the polymer’s melting point, and the reservoir chamber is packed with nitrogen and argon gases [13]. PCL, PLA, PHBV, and PEEK
have been employed for scaffold fabrication with SLS [113]. Ceramic HA, TCP, and
BG scaffolds have also been attained [138].
6.3 Clinical Application
The appropriate accuracy of SLS has made it a prime candidate for fabrication of
surgical models for training and treatment planning [25]. However, its timeconsuming procedure and untting haptic feedback bear inconveniences [25].
Considering that SLS and SLM offer apt accuracy and compatibility in terms of
manipulating metallic materials, their most common clinical application, compared
to other AM methods, is justiable. Titanium implants made via SLM have been
implanted for reconstructive purposes in a patient undergone complete maxillectomy, rhinectomy, and resection of upper lip and cheeks [139].
Three-dimensional printed titanium implants have been implanted in the orbital
wall [140, 141], cranial [142], and mandibular [143] regions for reconstructive purposes. Presurgically prepared titanium meshes can be used in mandibular reconstruction. Site- and patient-specically printed membranes contribute to decreased
operation time and the number of required xating screws [144]. Titanium meshes
are also utilized in prosthetically driven bone regeneration treatment modalities.
Through three-dimensional printing, dental implants can also be fabricated.
Accordingly, Tunchel etal. [145] fabricated a titanium implant, with a 94.5% of
success rate over 3years of follow-up. SLM-fabricated dental implants with gradient porous structures in the desired axis can also be produced for simultaneous
improved osteointegration and preserved structural consistency.
Classication ofCutting-Edge Additive Manufacturing Techniques
https://t.me/medicina_free
69
Bioresorbable implants have been developed using SLS.Rasperini etal. [146]
were rst to fabricate patient-specic periodontal implants composed of
PCL-HA.Their patient had large labial soft and hard tissue defects, which showed
feasible regenerative outcomes over 2years of follow-up.
6.4 Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS)
While with SLM, fusion is attained through thorough melting of the material powder, DMLS aims to heat metal powders up to the point wherein particles are fused.
Single element metals, including titanium, are worked with SLM. Unlike SLM,
DMLS allows working with metal alloys, leading to a potentially more exible
metallic material selection [147]. With DMLS, structural support during the procedure is warranted, which can be attained through supporting structures.
6.5 Electron Beam Melting (EBM)
In EBM, upon spreading of the metal powders on a preheated platform, a concentrated electron beam fuses the metallic powders. Tungsten laments are most commonly selected as electron-emitting compartments [148]. The fabricated constructs
are solidied via subsequent cooling. EBM provides higher printing speeds compared with SLM and DMLS.This is consequent to the higher energy density that is
provided by electron beams compared to lasers [147]. With EBM, conductive metals are solely employed. In order to avert gas contamination-related complications,
EBM is often conducted under vacuums [148].
References
1. Dolinski ND, Page ZA, Callaway EB, Eisenreich F, Garcia RV, Chavez R, etal. Solution
mask liquid lithography (SMaLL) for one-step, multimaterial 3D printing. Adv Mater.
2018;30(31):e1800364.
2. Yin H, Ding Y, Zhai Y, Tan W, Yin X. Orthogonal programming of heterogeneous micromechano- environments and geometries in three-dimensional bio-stereolithography. Nat
Commun. 2018;9(1):4096.
3. Huang Y, Leu MC, Mazumder J, Donmez A.Additive manufacturing: current state, future
potential, gaps and needs, and recommendations. J Manuf Sci Eng. 2015;137(1):1–5.
4. Calore AR, Sinha R, Harings J, Bernaerts KV, Mota C, Moroni L.Additive manufacturing
using melt extruded thermoplastics for tissue engineering. Computer-aided tissue engineering. Cham: Springer; 2021. p.75–99.
5. Willson K, Ke D, Kengla C, Atala A, Murphy SV.Extrusion-based bioprinting: current standards and relevancy for human-sized tissue fabrication. 3D Bioprinting. Cham: Springer;
2020. p.65–92.
6. Nyberg EL, Farris AL, Hung BP, Dias M, Garcia JR, Dorafshar AH, et al. 3D-printing
Technologies for Craniofacial Rehabilitation, reconstruction, and regeneration. Ann Biomed
Eng. 2017;45(1):45–57.
70
https://t.me/medicina_free
7. Haeri Boroojeni HS, Mohaghegh S, Khojasteh A.Application of CAD-CAM Technologies
for maxillofacial bone regeneration: a narrative review of the clinical studies. Curr Stem Cell
Res Ther. 2022.
8. Viera Rey DF, St-Pierre J-P. Fabrication techniques of tissue engineering scaffolds. In:
Mozafari M, Sefat F, Atala A, editors. Handbook of tissue engineering scaffolds: volume one.
Sawston: Woodhead Publishing; 2019. p.109–25.
9. Wang F, Shor L, Darling A, Khalil S, Sun W, Güçeri S, et al. Precision extruding deposition and characterization of cellular poly-ε-caprolactone tissue scaffolds. Rapid Prototyp
J. 2004;10(1):42–9.
10. Montero J, Becerro A, Pardal-Peláez B, Quispe-López N, Blanco JF, Gómez-Polo C.Main 3D
manufacturing techniques for customized bone substitutes. A systematic review. Materials.
2021;14(10):2524.
11. Liu F, Wang X. Synthetic polymers for organ 3D printing. Polymers (Basel). 2020;12(8):
1765.
12. Zhou C, Yang K, Wang K, Pei X, Dong Z, Hong Y, etal. Combination of fused deposition
modeling and gas foaming technique to fabricated hierarchical macro/microporous polymer
scaffolds. Mater Des. 2016;109:415–24.
13. Bártolo PJ, Almeida HA, Rezende RA, Laoui T, Bidanda B.Advanced processes to fabricate
scaffolds for tissue engineering. In: Bidanda B, Bártolo P, editors. Virtual prototyping & bio
Manufacturing in medical applications. Boston, MA: Springer; 2008. p.149–70.
14. van Noort R.The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mat. 2012;28(1):3–12.
15. Sachlos E, Czernuszka JT.Making tissue engineering scaffolds work review: the application
of solid freeform fabrication technology to the production of tissue engineering scaffolds. Eur
Cell Mater. 2003;5:29–39,discussion, 40
16. Hutmacher DW, Schantz T, Zein I, Ng KW, Teoh SH, Tan KC.Mechanical properties and cell
cultural response of polycaprolactone scaffolds designed and fabricated via fused deposition
modeling. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;55(2):203–16.
17. Perez-Puyana V, Jiménez-Rosado M, Romero A, Guerrero A.Polymer-based scaffolds for
soft-tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel). 2020;12(7):1566.
18. Chia HN, Wu BM. Recent advances in 3D printing of biomaterials. J Biol Eng. 2015;
9(1):4.
19. Yang Y, Wang G, Liang H, Gao C, Peng S, Shen L, etal. Additive manufacturing of bone
scaffolds. Int J Bioprinting. 2018;5(1):148.
20. Goh BT, Teh LY, Tan DB, Zhang Z, Teoh SH. Novel 3D polycaprolactone scaffold for
ridge preservation—a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res.
2015;26(3):271–7.
21. Probst FA, Hutmacher DW, Müller DF, Machens HG, Schantz JT.Calvarial reconstruction by
customized bioactive implant. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2010;42(6):369–73.
22. Han HH, Shim J-H, Lee H, Kim BY, Lee J-S, Jung JW, etal. Reconstruction of complex
maxillary defects using patient-specic 3D-printed biodegradable scaffolds. Plast Reconstr
Surg Glob Open. 2018;6(11):e1975.
23. Flores RL, Liss H, Raffaelli S, Humayun A, Khouri KS, Coelho PG, etal. The technique for
3D printing patient-specic models for auricular reconstruction. J Craniomaxillofac Surg.
2017;45(6):937–43.
24. Lethaus B, Poort L, Böckmann R, Smeets R, Tolba R, Kessler P.Additive manufacturing
for microvascular reconstruction of the mandible in 20 patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg.
2012;40(1):43–6.
25. Meglioli M, Naveau A, Macaluso GM, Catros S. 3D printed bone models in oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery: a systematic review. 3D Print Med. 2020;6(1):30.
26. Liang K, Carmone S, Brambilla D, Leroux J-C. 3D printing of a wearable personalized oral
delivery device: a rst-in-human study. Sci Adv. 2018;4(5):eaat2544.
27. Dabadi S, Dhungel RR, Sharma U, Shrestha D, Gurung P, Shrestha R, et al. Customized
cost-effective polymethyl-methacrylate cranioplasty implant using three-dimensional printer.
Asian J Neurosurg. 2021;16(1):150–4.
H. S. H. Boroojeni et al.
Classication ofCutting-Edge Additive Manufacturing Techniques
https://t.me/medicina_free
28. Kim B-J, Hong K-S, Park K-J, Park D-H, Chung Y-G, Kang S-H.Customized cranioplasty
implants using three-dimensional printers and polymethyl-methacrylate casting. J Korean
Neurosurg Soc. 2012;52(6):541–6.
29. Rotaru H, Stan H, Florian IS, Schumacher R, Park YT, Kim SG, etal. Cranioplasty with
custom-made implants: analyzing the cases of 10 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2012;70(2):e169–76.
30. Morales-Gómez JA, Garcia-Estrada E, Leos-Bortoni JE, Delgado-Brito M, Flores-Huerta
LE, De La Cruz-Arriaga AA, etal. Cranioplasty with a low-cost customized polymethylmethacrylate implant using a desktop 3D printer. J Neurosurg. 2019;130(5):1721–7.
31. Chamo D, Msallem B, Sharma N, Aghlmandi S, Kunz C, Thieringer FM.Accuracy assessment of molded, patient-specic polymethylmethacrylate craniofacial implants compared to
their 3D printed originals. J Clin Med. 2020;9(3):832.
32. Kang J, Wang L, Yang C, Wang L, Yi C, He J, etal. Custom design and biomechanical analysis of 3D-printed PEEK rib prostheses. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2018;17(4):1083–92.
33. Xiong Z, Yan Y, Wang S, Zhang R, Zhang C.Fabrication of porous scaffolds for bone tissue
engineering via low-temperature deposition. Scr Mater. 2002;46(11):771–6.
34. Liu W, Wang D, Huang J, Wei Y, Xiong J, Zhu W, etal. Low-temperature deposition manufacturing: a novel and promising rapid prototyping technology for the fabrication of tissueengineered scaffold. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017;70(Pt 2):976–82.
35. Liu L, Xiong Z, Zhang R, Jin L, Yan Y. A novel osteochondral scaffold fabricated via
multi-nozzle low-temperature deposition manufacturing. J Bioact Compat Polym.
2009;24(1_suppl):18–30.
36. Wang X, Rijff BL, Khang G. A building-block approach to 3D printing a multichannel,
organ-regenerative scaffold. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2017;11(5):1403–11.
37. Boyle BM, Xiong PT, Mensch TE, Werder TJ, Miyake GM. 3D printing using powder melt
extrusion. Addit Manuf. 2019;29:100811.
38. Goyanes A, Allahham N, Treneld SJ, Stoyanov E, Gaisford S, Basit AW.Direct powder
extrusion 3D printing: fabrication of drug products using a novel single-step process. Int J
Pharm. 2019;567:118471.
39. Puppi D, Piras AM, Pirosa A, Sandreschi S, Chiellini F. Levooxacin-loaded star poly
(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds by additive manufacturing. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2016;27(3):44.
40. Puppi D, Chiellini F.Wet-spinning of biomedical polymers: from single-bre production
to additive manufacturing of three-dimensional scaffolds. Polym Int. 2017;66(12):1690–6.
41. Puppi D, Mota C, Gazzarri M, Dinucci D, Gloria A, Myrzabekova M, etal. Additive manufacturing of wet-spun polymeric scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomed Microdevices.
2012;14(6):1115–27.
42. Tuzlakoglu K, Reis R.Chitosan-based scaffolds in orthopedic applications. In: Natural-based
polymers for biomedical applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2008. p.357–73.
43. Puppi D, Zhang X, Yang L, Chiellini F, Sun X, Chiellini E.Nano/microbrous polymeric
constructs loaded with bioactive agents and designed for tissue engineering applications: a
review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2014;102(7):1562–79.
44. Puppi D, Dinucci D, Bartoli C, Mota C, Migone C, Dini F, etal. Development of 3D wet-spun
polymeric scaffolds loaded with antimicrobial agents for bone engineering. J Bioact Compat
Polym. 2011;26(5):478–92.
45. Puppi D, Piras AM, Chiellini F, Chiellini E, Martins A, Leonor IB, etal. Optimized electroand wet-spinning techniques for the production of polymeric brous scaffolds loaded with
bisphosphonate and hydroxyapatite. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2011;5(4):253–63.
46. Tuzlakoglu K, Alves CM, Mano JF, Reis RL.Production and characterization of chitosan
bers and 3-D ber mesh scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Macromol Biosci.
2004;4(8):811–9.
47. Tuzlakoglu K, Pashkuleva I, Rodrigues MT, Gomes ME, van Lenthe GH, Müller R, etal.
A new route to produce starch-based ber mesh scaffolds by wet spinning and subsequent
surface modication as a way to improve cell attachment and proliferation. J Biomed Mater
Res. 2010;92(1):369–77.
71
72
https://t.me/medicina_free
48. Pashkuleva I, López-Pérez PM, Azevedo HS, Reis RL.Highly porous and interconnected
starch-based scaffolds: production, characterization and surface modication. Mater Sci Eng
C. 2010;30(7):981–9.
49. Mathiowitz E, Lavin DM, Hopkins RA.Wet spun microbers: potential in the design of
controlled-release scaffolds? Ther Deliv. 2013;4(9):1075–7.
50. Hirano S, Zhang M, Nakagawa M. Release of glycosaminoglycans in physiological
saline and water by wet-spun chitin–acid glycosaminoglycan bers. J Biomed Mater Res.
2001;56(4):556–61.
51. Denkbaş E, Seyyal M, Pişkin E.Implantable 5-uorouracil loaded chitosan scaffolds prepared by wet spinning. J Membr Sci. 2000;172(1–2):33–8.
52. Ucar S, Yilgor P, Hasirci V, Hasirci N.Chitosan-based wet-spun scaffolds for bioactive agent
delivery. J Appl Polym Sci. 2013;130(5):3759–69.
53. Nie H-L, Ma Z-H, Fan Z-X, Branford-White CJ, Ning X, Zhu L-M, etal. Polyacrylonitrile
bers efciently loaded with tamoxifen citrate using wet-spinning from co-dissolving solution. Int J Pharm. 2009;373(1–2):4–9.
54. Rissanen M, Puolakka A, Ahola N, Tonry A, Rochev Y, Kellomäki M, etal. Effect of proteinloading on properties of wet-spun poly (l, d-lactide) multilament bers. J Appl Polym Sci.
2010;116(4):2174–80.
55. Jung M-R, Shim I-K, Kim E-S, Park Y-J, Yang Y-I, Lee S-K, et al. Controlled release of
cell-permeable gene complex from poly (L-lactide) scaffold for enhanced stem cell tissue
engineering. J Control Release. 2011;152(2):294–302.
56. Lavin DM, Stefani RM, Zhang L, Furtado S, Hopkins RA, Mathiowitz E.Multifunctional
polymeric microbers with prolonged drug delivery and structural support capabilities. Acta
Biomater. 2012;8(5):1891–900.
57. Lavin DM, Zhang L, Furtado S, Hopkins RA, Mathiowitz E.Effects of protein molecular
weight on the intrinsic material properties and release kinetics of wet spun polymeric microber delivery systems. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(1):4569–78.
58. Hirano S.Wet-spinning and applications of functional bers based on chitin and chitosan. In:
Macromolecular symposia. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2001.
59. Puppi D, Pirosa A, Lupi G, Erba PA, Giachi G, Chiellini F.Design and fabrication of novel
polymeric biodegradable stents for small caliber blood vessels by computer-aided wetspinning. Biomed Mater. 2017;12(3):035011.
60. Puppi D, Morelli A, Bello F, Valentini S, Chiellini F. Additive manufacturing of poly
(methyl methacrylate) biomedical implants with dual-scale porosity. Macromol Mater Eng.
2018;303(9):1800247.
61. Puppi D, Morelli A, Chiellini F. Additive manufacturing of poly (3-hydroxybutyrateco-3-hydroxyhexanoate)/poly (ε-caprolactone) blend scaffolds for tissue engineering.
Bioengineering. 2017;4(2):49.
62. Mota C, Puppi D, Dinucci D, Gazzarri M, Chiellini F.Additive manufacturing of star poly
(ε-caprolactone) wet-spun scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications. J Bioact
Compat Polym. 2013;28(4):320–40.
63. Neves SC, Mota C, Longoni A, Barrias CC, Granja PL, Moroni L.Additive manufactured
polymeric 3D scaffolds with tailored surface topography inuence mesenchymal stromal
cells activity. Biofabrication. 2016;8(2):025012.
64. Holzapfel BM, Reichert JC, Schantz J-T, Gbureck U, Rackwitz L, Nöth U, etal. How smart
do biomaterials need to be? A translational science and clinical point of view. Adv Drug Deliv
Rev. 2013;65(4):581–603.
65. Kyriakidou K, Lucarini G, Zizzi A, Salvolini E, Mattioli Belmonte M, Mollica F, etal.
Dynamic co-seeding of osteoblast and endothelial cells on 3D polycaprolactone scaffolds for enhanced bone tissue engineering. J Bioact Compat Polym. 2008;23(3):
227–43.
66. Dini F, Barsotti G, Puppi D, Coli A, Briganti A, Giannessi E, et al. Tailored star poly
(ε-caprolactone) wet-spun scaffolds for invivo regeneration of long bone critical size defects.
J Bioact Compat Polym. 2016;31(1):15–30.
H. S. H. Boroojeni et al.
Classication ofCutting-Edge Additive Manufacturing Techniques
https://t.me/medicina_free
67. Mota C, Puppi D, Chiellini F, Chiellini E.Additive manufacturing techniques for the production of tissue engineering constructs. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2015;9(3):174–90.
68. Boland T, Xu T, Damon B, Cui X.Application of inkjet printing to tissue engineering.
Biotechnol J. 2006;1(9):910–7.
69. Mohebi MM, Evans JR.A drop-on-demand ink-jet printer for combinatorial libraries and
functionally graded ceramics. J Comb Chem. 2002;4(4):267–74.
70. Zohora FT, Azim AYMA. Inkjet printing: an emerging technology for 3d tissue or organ
printing. Eur Sci J. 2014;10(30):1857.
71. Mohaghegh S, Hosseini S, Rezai Rad M, Khojasteh A. 3D printed composite scaffolds in
bone tissue engineering: a systematic review. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther. 2021;16:648.
72. Kumar P, Ebbens S, Zhao X.Inkjet printing of mammalian cells–theory and applications.
Bioprinting. 2021;23:e00157.
73. Alamán J, Alicante R, Peña JI, Sánchez-Somolinos C.Inkjet printing of functional materials
for optical and photonic applications. Materials. 2016;9(11):910.
74. Tao O, Kort-Mascort J, Lin Y, Pham HM, Charbonneau AM, ElKashty OA, etal. The applications of 3D printing for craniofacial tissue engineering. Micromachines. 2019;10(7):480.
75. Jammalamadaka U, Tappa K. Recent advances in biomaterials for 3D printing and tissue
engineering. J Funct Biomater. 2018;9(1):22.
76. Tappa K, Jammalamadaka U.Novel biomaterials used in medical 3D printing techniques. J
Funct Biomater. 2018;9(1):17.
77. Zhang Y, Tse C, Rouholamin D, Smith PJ. Scaffolds for tissue engineering produced by
inkjet printing. Cent Eur J Eng. 2012;2(3):325–35.
78. Shirazi SFS, Gharehkhani S, Mehrali M, Yarmand H, Metselaar HSC, Kadri NA, etal. A
review on powder-based additive manufacturing for tissue engineering: selective laser sintering and inkjet 3D printing. Sci Technol Adv Mater. 2015;16:033502.
79. Delaney JT, Smith PJ, Schubert US. Inkjet printing of proteins. Soft Matter.
2009;5(24):4866–77.
80. Saunders RE, Derby B.Inkjet printing biomaterials for tissue engineering: bioprinting. Int
Mater Rev. 2014;59(8):430–48.
81. Li J, Rossignol F, Macdonald J.Inkjet printing for biosensor fabrication: combining chemistry and technology for advanced manufacturing. Lab Chip. 2015;15(12):2538–58.
82. Kenyon R.Ink jet printing. In: Chemistry and technology of printing and imaging systems.
Cham: Springer; 1996. p.113–38.
83. Gregory P.Presented in part at the International Textile Machinery Association. Textile ink jet
printing a review of ink jet printing of textiles, including ITMA 2003. 2003.
84. Matsuda Y, Sakata M, Yamada T, Yoshino M. Microdot ink jet recorder. Assignee: Hitachi
Koki, Co Ltd. US4746928 A. 1988.
85. Sridhar A, Blaudeck T, Baumann RR.Inkjet printing as a key enabling technology for printed
electronics. Mater Matt. 2011;6(1):12–5.
86. Cui X, Boland T, DD'Lima D, Lotz KM.Thermal inkjet printing in tissue engineering and
regenerative medicine. Recent Pat Drug Deliv Formul. 2012;6(2):149–55.
87. Hock SW, Johnson DA, Van Veen MA.Print quality optimization for a color ink-jet printer
by using a larger nozzle for the black ink only. Google Patents. 1996.
88. Hudson KR, Cowan PB, Gondek JS.Ink drop volume variance compensation for inkjet printing. Google Patents. 2000.
89. Murphy SV, Atala A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(8):773–85.
90. Calvert P.Printing cells. Science. 2007;318(5848):208–9.
91. Mandrycky C, Wang Z, Kim K, Kim D-H. 3D bioprinting for engineering complex tissues.
Biotechnol Adv. 2016;34(4):422–34.
92. de Jong J, de Bruin G, Reinten H, van den Berg M, Wijshoff H, Versluis M, etal. Air entrapment in piezo-driven inkjet printheads. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006;120(3):1257–65.
93. Henares TG, Yamada K, Suzuki K, Citterio D.Inkjet printing of biomolecules for biorecognition. Design of polymeric platforms for selective biorecognition. Cham: Springer; 2015.
p.197–235.
73
74
https://t.me/medicina_free
94. Fang Y, Frampton JP, Raghavan S, Sabahi-Kaviani R, Luker G, Deng CX, etal. Rapid generation of multiplexed cell cocultures using acoustic droplet ejection followed by aqueous
two-phase exclusion patterning. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2012;18(9):647–57.
95. Sirringhaus H, Kawase T, Friend R, Shimoda T, Inbasekaran M, Wu W, etal. High-resolution
inkjet printing of all-polymer transistor circuits. Science. 2000;290(5499):2123–6.
96. Wang J, Zheng Z, Li H, Huck W, Sirringhaus H.Dewetting of conducting polymer inkjet
droplets on patterned surfaces. Nat Mater. 2004;3(3):171–6.
97. Hughes TR, Mao M, Jones AR, Burchard J, Marton MJ, Shannon KW, etal. Expression proling using microarrays fabricated by an ink-jet oligonucleotide synthesizer. Nat Biotechnol.
2001;19(4):342–7.
98. Lemmo AV, Rose DJ, Tisone TC.Inkjet dispensing technology: applications in drug discovery. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 1998;9(6):615–7.
99. Okamoto T, Suzuki T, Yamamoto N.Microarray fabrication with covalent attachment of
DNA using bubble jet technology. Nat Biotechnol. 2000;18(4):438–41.
100. Roda A, Guardigli M, Russo C, Pasini P, Baraldini M.Protein microdeposition using a conventional ink-jet printer. BioTechniques. 2000;28(3):492–6.
101. Tekin E, Smith PJ, Schubert US.Inkjet printing as a deposition and patterning tool for polymers and inorganic particles. Soft Matter. 2008;4(4):703–13.
102. Inzana JA, Olvera D, Fuller SM, Kelly JP, Graeve OA, Schwarz EM, etal. 3D printing of
composite calcium phosphate and collagen scaffolds for bone regeneration. Biomaterials.
2014;35(13):4026–34.
103. Barinov S, Vakhrushev I, Komlev V, Mironov A, Popov V, Teterina AY, et al. 3D printing of ceramic scaffolds for engineering of bone tissue. Inorg Mater Appl Res. 2015;6(4):
316–22.
104. Cooper GM, Miller ED, DeCesare GE, Usas A, Lensie EL, Bykowski MR, etal. Inkjet-based
biopatterning of bone morphogenetic protein-2 to spatially control calvarial bone formation.
Tissue Eng Part A. 2010;16(5):1749–59.
105. Chou D-T, Wells D, Hong D, Lee B, Kuhn H, Kumta PN.Novel processing of iron–manganese alloy-based biomaterials by inkjet 3-D printing. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(10):8593–603.
106. Seetharam R, Sharma SK.Purication and analysis of recombinant proteins. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC; 1991.
107. Cui X, Dean D, Ruggeri ZM, Boland T.Cell damage evaluation of thermal inkjet printed
Chinese hamster ovary cells. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2010;106(6):963–9.
108. Ronca A, Ambrosio L, Grijpma DW. Design of porous three-dimensional PDLLA/
nano-hap composite scaffolds using stereolithography. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater.
2012;10(3):249–58.
109. Lee JW, Kang KS, Lee SH, Kim JY, Lee BK, Cho DW. Bone regeneration using a
microstereolithography- produced customized poly(propylene fumarate)/diethyl fumarate
photopolymer 3D scaffold incorporating BMP-2 loaded PLGA microspheres. Biomaterials.
2011;32(3):744–52.
110. Stein F, Trikalitis V, Rouwkema J, Salehi-Nik N.Vascularization in oral and maxillofacial
tissue engineering. In: Seppänen-Kaijansinkko R, editor. Tissue engineering in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Cham: Springer; 2019. p.97–122.
111. Lemercier G, Mulatier J, Martineau C, Anémian R, Andraud C, Wang I, etal. Two-photon
absorption: from optical power limiting to 3D microfabrication. C R Chim. 2005;8:
1308–16.
112. Huang J, Qin Q, Wang JJP.A review of stereolithography: processes and systems. Processes.
2020;8(9):1138.
113. Ji K, Wang Y, Wei Q, Zhang K, Jiang A, Rao Y, etal. Application of 3D printing technology
in bone tissue engineering. Bio-Des Manuf. 2018;1(3):203–10.
114. Wen Y, Xun S, Haoye M, Baichuan S, Peng C, Xuejian L, etal. 3D printed porous ceramic
scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: a review. Biomater Sci. 2017;5(9):1690–8.
115. Du X, Fu S, Zhu Y. 3D printing of ceramic-based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: an
overview. J Mater Chem B. 2018;6(27):4397–412.
H. S. H. Boroojeni et al.
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана