Добавил:
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_5361_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
23 Мб
Скачать
6 Tribological Hurdles inBiomedical Manufacturing: AComprehensive Examination
6.4.2.9 4D Printing Techniques
Hollow self-folding 4D vascular tubes with shape memory are fabricated using DIW printing techniques. Utilizing DIW printing technology, hollow, self-folding 4D vascular tubes are produced. DIW printing makes use of shape-morphing bio­polymer hydrogels, such as methacrylated alginate (HAMA) and methacrylated hyaluronic acid (AA-MA), respectively. Development of biodegradable polymer­cell architectures with adjustable response and functionality to produce intricate, dynamic 4D structures [1]. The method for printing a vascular 4D scaffold isdirectly using SMNCs: iron oxide and SMPs: PLA ink. A SMPsis a stimuli-responsive vascular 4D stent that is actuated by a magnetic eld and may be remotely modied. Wei etal.’s study demonstrated the direct printing of a vascular 4D scaffold using SMPs: PLA ink and SMNCs: Fe3O4. The vascular 4D scaffold’s shape recovery process was triggered by the addition of Fe3O4 nanoparticles, allowing for remotely actuated behavior. The Cabrera etal. research team proposed a proof-of-concept (POC) study [1].
6.4.2.10 Advanced Biomedical Techniques Involving Biorobots
Combining 3D and 4D printing techniques will enable the development of advanced biomedical equipment that will have a major impact on the eld of biomedicine in the future, such as biosensors, bionic ears and eyes, and biorobots, hydrogel can also be used as nanorobots for slow drug release targeted hydrogel delivery.
185
6.5 Challenges withApplying Biotribology
inBiomedical Devices
Some of the challenges associated with biomedical devices are making the device nano, large-scale production of the device, inconsistency of quality of the device, use of chips in human organs (brain), high-cost manufacturing, mechanical biocom­patibility, poor bioprinting mechanism, cell damage rate (high), and the device user’s ability [5861].
1. Making the device nano
The major challenge lies inside the innovation of nanobiosensing that incor­porates its tall-fetched and insufcient versatility courses. Additionally, endeav­ors must be taken in expository system of this novel innovation, in that way reproducible manufacture must be conceivable.
Among the main issues with non-invasive devices are their application, accu­racy, and usability. For instance, the physiological time lag between blood and glucose and the indirect nature of measurement in the case of non-invasive glu­cose monitoring devices result in low usability and decreased accuracy. Another
186
A. Kumar etal.
crucial issue is the usability of non-invasive devices for use in homes and busi­nesses, namely in terms of their ultra-portability and simplicity while taking the human factor into consideration. Adequate health data security is a restriction of non-invasive devices, particularly when complicated technology is incorporated. Moreover, there are disadvantages to non-invasive smart implants, like a lack of regulations governing their use, privacy issues, and a small memory capacity [62, 63]. We still need to investigate the connection between NPs’ production and function. NPs frequently adsorb plasma proteins, which then interact with the body’s immune system. They may also lead to the formation of free radicals, which can also be genotoxic. Because expensive characterization devices are required, the cost of nanomedicines is signicantly higher than that of traditional treatments. Furthermore, when compared to traditional therapies, nanomedi­cines exhibit a higher degree of safety; yet, medical professionals typically do not recommend an upgrade in the adequacy level. Given their vast surface area and smaller particle size, nanomedicines generally provide an intriguing poten­tial to improve bioavailability and reduce dosage frequency [64].
2. Large-scale production of the device Critical reviews that disseminate the pertinent knowledge for the nanoparti-
cles design, shapes and sizes, as well as their synthesis and characterization tech­niques, are generally lacking in commercial biomedical applications that is, outside of the conventional small-scale laboratory experiments. We ascribe this void in discourse to a multitude of challenges related to the large-scale (com­mercial) manufacturing of nanomaterials for biomedical uses. Among these challenges is determining how to produce nanomaterials in big quantities at a reasonable cost. To do this, a preparation technique must be dened and suf­ciently scaled up to cover the costs associated with pursuing volume markets [64].
3. Inconsistency of quality of the device The role of IoT in healthcare, the greatest challenge is devices’ interoperabil-
ity, which can lead to an arrange being uncovered to modern security vulnerabili­ties and extra hazard. The increment of intellectual property (IP)-connected sensors in healing center gear and patients permits disposal of pointless squander and spares lives. IoT healthcare in a time of ceaseless development, faces chal­lenges, such as the collection, quality estimation, translation, and harmonization of the information that’s inferred from the tremendous sums of heterogeneous IoT restorative gadgets. A component is delivered to viably address the crossing point of these challenges [1].
4. Use of chips in human organs (brain) According to recent advancements, brain-machine interfacing holds guaran-
tee for the rebuilding of tangible and engine work and the treatment of neurologi­cal disarranges, but clinical brain-machine interfacing has not however been broadly received, in portion, since humble channel checks have constrained their potential. In this white paper, we depict Neuralink’s to begin with steps toward an adaptable high-bandwidth brain-machine interface framework. We have built clusters of little and adaptable anode “threads,” with as numerous as 3072 termi-
6 Tribological Hurdles inBiomedical Manufacturing: AComprehensive Examination
nals per cluster disseminated over 96 strings. We have too built a neurosurgical robot competent of embedding’s six strings (192 terminals) per diminutive. Each string can be exclusively embedded into the brain with micron exactness for eva­sion of surface vasculature and focusing on particular brain locales. The anode cluster is bundled into a little implantable gadget that contains custom chips for low-power on-board enhancement and digitization [65].
First, the processing of massive neural signals. According to statistics, the
current BCI technology ability to record twice as many neurons simultaneously requires an average of 7.4years. It will take until 2100years to record 1million neurons at the same time, but to record all the human brain neurons. Neurons, you have to wait until 2225. Therefore, how many electrodes to implant is enough to basically span major brain functions or fulll a specic functional need, that is, how to solve the issue with effective bandwidth of the brain-computer inter­face has become the key point of academic research breakthroughs. Second, the signal recognition accuracy is low [66].
5. High-cost manufacturing Among other techniques, profound brain incitement surgery can provide
effective tremor control. However, its use is limited because of high expenses, discrete, business-like preferences, and perceived high risk. Tremors are the most common developmental disorder that interferes with daily activities and physical activity, ultimately leading to a lower quality of life for the patient. Robust tremor control can be achieved with surgical interventions such as deep brain stimulation. However, their use is limited due to high costs, professional and comprehension biases, and perceived high risks [1].
6. Mechanical biocompatibility The least amount of toxicity, blood protein adhesion obstruction, and other
problems should exist. The polymeric matrix simultaneously improves load redistribution via the softer matrix and increases the overall stiffness of the com­posite [67]. It is possible to summarize shape memory thermosets as having a range of thermo-mechanical qualities that make them useful for medical devices. However, managing them is difcult due to their insolubility and inability to stream like tar. The ability to overcome this obstacle will be extremely benecial to the advancement of this merger [1].
7. Poor bioprinting mechanism Diverse sellers have created their apparatuses, but standardization is still
missing. So also, how do we guarantee that free powders will not come out and go into the circulation system after permeable inserts are put within the body? What are the warm medicines that are required for diverse 3D-printed gadgets? In spite of the fact that comes about so distant are empowering, standardization of numerous such operations will ease the administrative burden around the world. Another range of critical signicance is combination plan? Utilizing the 3D-printing courses, can we create unused amalgams outlined for 3D-printing forms? [68].
187
188
8. Cell damage rate (high) There are limited biomaterials available and they can create certain damage to
cells that they are around, there might be a possibility of no adhesion to cells which are targeted potentially. Damage rate of using device might differ.
The larger part of tribological tests performed on natural tissues and cellular
monolayers within the writing have measured powers and decided grinding coef­cients but have not completely examined the cellular reaction past a live/dead test. Ponders have shown that as it were a number of Pascal’s of shear stretch are adequate to inspire a natural reaction and actuate cellular apparatus [69].
9. The device user’s ability The gadget user’s capacity to function as a therapeutic gadget depends by and
large on the individual characteristics of the client such as tactile capacities (vision, hearing, cognitive capacities, material affectability), education and dia­lect aptitudes, by and large physical make-up (estimate, quality, adaptability, and coordination), level of instruction, and the common knowledge of comparable types of gadgets (eagerness to memorize and adjust to unused gadgets).
A. Kumar etal.
6.6 Future Scopes ofBiotribology intheField ofBiomedical
Devices, Targeting andTroubleshooting theChallenges
The integration of 3D and 4D printing technologies will facilitate the creation of sophisticated biomedical devices, including biosensors, bionic ears and eyes, and biorobots, which are expected to signicantly inuence the biomedical industry in the future. By combining 3D and 4D printing techniques, advanced biomedical devices that include biosensors and eyes, and biorobots that signicantly impact the eld of biomedicine can be created. With the exception of MRI devices, laser games, laser pointers, uid crystal displays (LCDs), mammography devices, the majority of devices that produce radiation fall beyond the denition of a medical device [1]. The most effective method currently known for replicating the greasy structure of syno­vial uid in microgels is for the production of synovial liquid, which is used in biomimetic watery oil applications and joint pain medications. The ndings of this creation technique could be useful for preliminary research on relevant issues related to IC motor oils. Current gecko skin qualities allow for a variety of water- repellent, self-cleaning, antimicrobial, and biocompatible coatings in both terrestrial and marine environments. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that this innovation will eventually be commercially integrated into a variety of products [7076].
There is enormous room for improvement in the replication of creepy crawly silk, shark skin characteristics, and catsh skin body uid since these methods cur­rently lack a thorough understanding of how they function organically and how to make them for use in buildings. If skillfully executed, one of the most compelling ideas for a self-healing surface inspired by pitcher plants ought to be the most com­pelling invention [77]. Quick cooling techniques that are typical of 3D printing were
6 Tribological Hurdles inBiomedical Manufacturing: AComprehensive Examination
189
maintained by avoiding creating exotic combinations like Ti6Al4V. Nevertheless, even though the fabrication handle’s energy is remarkably unique, the same compo­sition is used in 3D printing processes [7881]. It is anticipated that leftover amal­gam will be designed for forms based on 3D printing and used for biomedical devices. Similar to metallic devices, bioprinted goods currently require administra­tive regulations because such forms are still developing [77]. HFE, often known as usability building, is the process of applying human factors into the design of devices or hardware so that users can easily, protably, and safely use it. HFE is used not only in the design of the devices but also in the evaluation of therapeutic devices through techniques that advance the evidence-based practice, which primar­ily increases quiet safety [82, 83]. The design of portable dialysis devices has been aided by recent advancements in HFE applications. The most recent model of a versatile dialysis device expands functionality, indicating that concerns about human components (such as productivity, bulk, and weight) are now taken into con­sideration [1]. The biggest obstacle to the IoT role in healthcare is device interoper­ability, which can expose a system to additional risk and new security aws. An increase in intellectual property (IP)-connected sensors in medical equipment and patients allows for the elimination of unnecessary waste and perhaps saves lives. In an era of constant advancement, IoT healthcare encounters difculties with data collecting, quality assessment, translation, and harmonization resulting from vast amounts of disparate IoT medical devices. Delivered to effectively address the inter­section of these difculties is a component [1]. Before a device is implanted in the body, it has been recommended that skin antiseptics be used often to reduce the risk of infection. One such product is 2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% isopropyl alcohol [1]. Some devices eventually need to be removed in order to reduce the much increased risk of infection from bacteria that multiply and can quickly build a biolm that can cause excruciating pain [14]. It is possible to improve and continu­ally monitor glucose monitoring with the use of well-equipped biosensing equip­ment [8493]. Research is still ongoing to determine whether tears, saliva, sweat, mucus from the airways, or the interstitial uid of subcutaneous tissue may be used as a straightforward and less invasive technique to regularly measure glucose levels. The existing glucose monitoring devices measure the glucose levels in interstitial uid in real time with minimal invasiveness; nevertheless, they do so by piercing the skin [22].
A biosensor called salivary conductivity is used to detect chronic uropathy. Using tiny coplanar biosensing probes, a system has been designed to monitor salivary conductivity at a coffee volume (50μL). The early results of a recent study showed that salivary conductivity was much higher in CKD patients. The ability to sense selectively, quick analysis times, and inexpensive cost distinguish voltammetry sen­sors from the competitors [1]. The binder jetting technology has a lot of potential for creating glass or ceramic scaffolds for small-scale bone lesions that are either defect-specic or patient-matched. Binder jetting-based 3D printing, which may be utilized commercially for the mass production of such devices, also makes it simple to program controlled drug doses [77]. Non-invasive devices and methods have sev­eral benets for patients, including reduced risk of illness, damage, faster recovery,
190
A. Kumar etal.
and cheaper costs associated with hospital stays and therapeutic drugs. A non­invasive device, like an electronic skin patch, can detect high levels of glucose in perspiration [1, 91, 94100]. In biotribology for biomedical device development, optimized vacuum vessel designs with smart manufacturing systems (CNC) prom­ise revolutionary manufacturing techniques, ensuring enhanced efciency, preci­sion, and safety [105, 106]. An efcient HVAC and system is also crucial, maintaining precise environmental conditions like temperature and humidity, ensur­ing reliable and high-quality manufacturing processes in the biomedical eld [107109].
Using softwares like Autodock, Discovery studio, Pyrx will help in recognizing the material (protein or ligand) in silico. It also helps in estimatingthe interaction that is taking place, such asbond types (Protein ligand interaction proler)and their negative delta G prediction in nature(mimicking).Hence, minimizing uncertainty in case of interactions. Bioinformatics can be one of the brightest scope, the methods given below include the use of 2 software. Any Ligand(material) can be docked in PyRx against any kind of natural body (Proteins, tissues). They can be docked again in Autodock tool (ADK, universal tool for molecular docking and simulations). Screenshots of all of the tools are given as below. This is how any ligand can be seen with details in interaction to improve with the challenges of adhesion to protein, cell attachment accuracy, and predication of natural mimicking biomedical system. In order to conduct molecular docking, we need a 3D protein structure of species, tis­sues, RNA or DNA sequences which we can get from RCSB-PDB. PSCB-PDB contains structure made up by computational process through NMR and X-RAY Crystallography [101104]. The second part we need is the polymer that we want to use in production of biomedical devices, which is available in databases like PubChem and chemical database ChEB or KEGG database [3234, 3740].
Use of these tools in biotribology can be implemented, we can fetch informa­tion’s regarding the biomaterial from these sources and use them further for specic and accurate desires of the experiments. For example, we can dock silicon material with retinal proteins to check biocompatibility and binding free energy between them, making these tools helpful for further application and surety regarding human health. Then the chips can be implanted in the human body (such as retinal prosthe­ses, which can be implanted in the eye) (Fig.6.5).
The software shows maximus free energy generation between ten different pos­sible interaction at tenbinding site of an enzyme, further in B it is conrmed that which binding site (catalytic triad of enzyme) is binding PET with bond type by 3D and 2D diagrams of the same interaction.
6.7 Summary andConclusion
This chapter talks about biological system, and how to dene them. For replacing or counter t the organs and prosthetics, and making of biomaterials, there is a need of very careful, preplanned, and intelligent systems that can mimic the nature enough
6 Tribological Hurdles inBiomedical Manufacturing: AComprehensive Examination
191
.pdb fomat was visualized
Results of affinity binding
values were obtained in
kcal/mol
Values less than -5.2(Chidi
Edbert Duru et al., 2021)
were chosen
Docking results were
confirmed by selecting
active sites in ADK tool
Fig. 6.5 Flow of analysis of results in ADK tool for prediction of free energy in nature between two chemical structures
in Discovery studio
v21.1.0.20298 software
Best confirmations were
converted to .pdb extension
by Open Bable GUI
Ligands PET binding at 10
different sites of protein
was observed and best
confirmation was selected
Protein-Ligand interaction
were studied with details
and 2D diagrams
Additionally, it showed
aromatic nature, H-bond,
charge, hydrophobicity,
ionizability and solubility in
solvent of a structure
to t it in, indeed. It used different sciences in order to design the perfect t for the target. A biomedical system works on a biomedical device that is precisely designed by keeping all of the specics of targeted disease or condition in mind. Biotribology plays an important role in shaping application and design of a biomedical device. According to the FDA of the US, medical devices are any tool, machine, apparatus, implant, and invitro reagent that is not a medicine used for human or animal diag­nostic or therapeutic purposes. According to the WHO, medical devices are any tool, machine, apparatus, appliance, or other item that the manufacturer has invented to be used for particular medical purposes and whose main function is not accom­plished by means of metabolic, immunological, or pharmacological means. Biomedical devices are classied into 3 classes, class 1, class 2, and class 3. Biomedical devices have 5 different types so far and they include different fabrica­tion or manufacturing techniques for production of these devices. Production of biomedical devices includes advanced technique developed by biocompatible lm technology, cost-effective techniques for CKD biodevice, non-invasive glucose monitoring devices technique, biosensing device techniques involving volumetric glucose sensors, optical or spectroscopy techniques for other detection purposes, cost-effective electrochemical voltametric sensors techniques, non-invasive glucose monitoring devices technique, 3D printing techniques, UV-LED stereolithography printer technique, 4D printing techniques, fabrication(techniques) of hollow self­folding 4D vascular tubes having shape memory by DIW printing techniques, tech­nique for direct-write printing of a vascular 4D scaffold by SMPs: PLA ink and SMNCs: Fe3O, advanced biomedical techniques involving biorobots. Biomedical devices are usedin several biomedical systems involving, arthropathy, dermatol­ogy, buccal cavity, human and animal organ system, therapeutics (cancer and immu­notherapy). This chapter analyses the current classications of medical devices, including software and hardware, and their applications, based on FDA criteria.
192
A. Kumar etal.
Challenges with making the biomedical devices are making the device nano, large­scale production of the device, inconsistency of quality of the device, Use of chips in human organs(brain), high-cost manufacturing, mechanical biocompatibility, poor bioprinting mechanism, cell damage rate(high), The device user’s ability. In order to reduce the likelihood of product recalls, use errors, and promote safe usage, human factors engineering is crucial when developing biomedical devices. In terms of future prospects, various challenges can be solved by using combination of 3D and 4D printing techniques, biomedical gadgets which incorporate biosensors, bionic ears/eyes, and biorobots, microgels, biomimetic watery oil applications, gecko’s skin, creepy crawly silk, lotus leaf surface, shark skin properties, and catsh skin bodily uid, they are highly advances application and still lacking in under­standing of their organic working and strategy of manufacture. HFE, IoT in health­care, voltametric sensors, binder jetting-based 3D printing also has contribution to biomedical device’s future. Using software’s like Autodock, Discovery studio, and Pyrx to recognize the material (protein or ligand) in silico, knowing the interaction that is taking place, bond types (protein ligand interaction proler), their negative delta G prediction in nature (mimicking), and minimizing uncertainty in case of interactions can help achieving the desirable goals in the eld of biomedical devices.

References

1. F. Tettey, S. K. Parupelli, and S.Desai, “A Review of Biomedical Devices: Classication, Regulatory Guidelines, Human Factors, Software as a Medical Device, and Cybersecurity,” Biomedical Materials & Devices, no. August, 2023.
2. C.Peña, K.Li, R.Felten, N.Ogden, and M.Melkerson, “An example of US food and drug administration device regulation: Medical devices indicated for use in acute ischemic stroke,” Stroke, vol. 38, no. 6, pp.1988–1992, 2007.
3. W. H. Organization, Medical device regulations: global overview and guiding principles. World Health Organization, 2003.
4. D.J. Jones and M.T. Masters, “11.1. 3 Medical Device Development Process,” in INCOSE International Symposium, 2008, vol. 18, no. 1, pp.1215–1230.
5. L. H. Monsein, “Primer on medical device regulation. Part I.History and background.,” Radiology, vol. 205, no. 1, pp.1–9, 1997.
6. L.Keutzer and U. S. H.Simonsson, “Medical device apps: An introduction to regulatory affairs for developers,” JMIR mHealth and uHealth, vol. 8, no. 6, pp.1–7, 2020.
7. S.Mehta, “Hydrogel encapsulation of cells mimics the whole body response to LMHF vibra­tions,” ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, p.58, 2015.
8. D. J. Jones and M. T. Masters, “Medical device development process,” 18th Annual
International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering, INCOSE 2008, vol. 4, no. 25, pp.2169–2183, 2008.
9. E.Bennett, J. VanBuren, R.Holubkov, and S. Bratton, “Presence of Invasive Devices and Risks of Healthcare-Associated Infections and Sepsis,” Journal of Pediatric Intensive Care, vol. 07, no. 04, pp.188–195, 2018.
10. N.Buetti etal., “Strategies to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in acute- care hospitals: 2022 Update,” Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, vol. 43, no. 5, pp.553–569, 2022.
6 Tribological Hurdles inBiomedical Manufacturing: AComprehensive Examination
11. J.H. Traverse, T.D. Henry, and C.J. Pepine, “Intracoronary bone marrow mononuclear cells after myocardial infarction- Reply,” Jama, vol. 307, no. 10, pp.1023–1024, 2012.
12. R.B. Wilson and Y.Farooque, “Risks and Prevention of Surgical Site Infection After Hernia Mesh Repair and the Predictive Utility of ACS-NSQIP,” Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, vol. 26, no. 4, pp.950–964, 2022.
13. G.Flodgren, C.Lo, A.Mayhew, O.Omar, P.Cr, and S.Shepperd, “Interventions to improve professional adherence to guidelines for prevention of device-related infections (Review),” no. 4, 2013.
14. D. Lebeaux, J.-M. Ghigo, and C. Beloin, “Biolm-Related Infections: Bridging the Gap between Clinical Management and Fundamental Aspects of Recalcitrance toward Antibiotics,” Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, vol. 78, no. 3, pp.510–543, 2014.
15. P.Honigmann, N. Sharma, B.Okolo, U.Popp, B.Msallem, and F.M. Thieringer, “Patient­specic surgical implants made of 3D printed PEEK: Material, technology, and scope of surgical application,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2018, 2018.
16. A.A. Raheem etal., “A review on development of bio-inspired implants using 3d printing,” Biomimetics, vol. 6, no. 4, 2021.
17. W.Jamróz, J.Szafraniec, M.Kurek, and R.Jachowicz, “3D Printing in Pharmaceutical and Medical Applications- Recent Achievements and Challenges,” Pharmaceutical research, vol. 35, no. 9, Sep. 2018.
18. C. S. Lambert and M. Filho, “Improvement in Cranioplasty : Advanced Prosthesis Biomanufacturing,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 49, pp.203–208, 2016.
19. S.Desai and M.Lovell, “Journal of Materials Processing Technology Modeling uid– struc­ture interaction in a direct write manufacturing process,” Journal of Materials Processing Tech., vol. 212, no. 10, pp.2031–2040, 2012.
20. B. B. Seo et al., “Injectable polymeric nanoparticle hydrogel system for long-term anti- inammatory effect to treat osteoarthritis,” Bioactive Materials, vol. 7, no. May, pp.14–25, 2022.
21. W. Li, O. Auciello, R.N. Premnath, and B.Kabius, “Giant dielectric constant dominated by Maxwell-Wagner relaxation in Al 2 O3/TiO2 nanolaminates synthesized by atomic layer deposition,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 96, no. 16, 2010.
22. C.H. Chen, T.H. Tao, Y.H. Chou, Y.W. Chuang, and T.B. Chen, “Arteriovenous stula ow dysfunction surveillance: early detection using pulse radar sensor and machine learning clas­sication,” Biosensors, vol. 11, no. 9, 2021.
23. J.F. Mooney etal., “Relative value of cystatin C and creatinine-based estimates of glomerular ltration rate in predicting long-term mortality after cardiac surgery: A cohort study,” BMJ Open, vol. 9, no. 9, pp.1–9, 2019.
24. P.Teresa K. Chen, MD, MHS, Daphne H.Knicely, MD, Morgan E.Grams, MD, “乳鼠心 肌提取 HHS Public Access,” Physiology & behavior, vol. 176, no. 10, pp.139–148, 2017.
25. Y.Li etal., “Hydrogel dual delivered celecoxib and anti-PD-1 synergistically improve anti­tumor immunity,” OncoImmunology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp.1–12, 2016.
26. K.Wang etal., “GD2-specic CAR T cells encapsulated in an injectable hydrogel control retinoblastoma and preserve vision,” Nature Cancer, vol. 1, no. 10, pp.990–997, 2020.
27. Z.Meng et al., “In-situ re-melting and re-solidication treatment of selective laser sintered polycaprolactone lattice scaffolds for improved lament quality and mechanical properties,” Biofabrication, vol. 12, no. 3, p.035012, May 2020.
28. P. Kumar and R.Srivastava, Nanomedicine for cancer therapy: From chemotherapeutic to hyperthermia-based therapy, no. 9783319458250. 2017.
29. B.K. Jung, E.Oh, J.W. Hong, Y.Lee, K.D. Park, and C.O. Yun, “A hydrogel matrix pro­longs persistence and promotes specic localization of an oncolytic adenovirus in a tumor by restricting nonspecic shedding and an antiviral immune response,” Biomaterials, vol. 147, pp.26–38, 2017.
30. P. M. Johns-Rahnejat, R. Rahmani, and H. Rahnejat, “Current and Future Trends in Tribological Research,” Lubricants, vol. 11, no. 9, 2023.
193
194
31. G.Discussion, Tribology, no. 1997. 2014.
32. A. Kumar et al., “Biomedical study of femur bone fracture and healing,” in Advanced Materials for Biomedical Applications, CRC Press, 2022, pp.235–250.
33. A.Kumar, U.Panda, V.K. Patel, and R.Kant, “Laser-Assisted Fabrication of Polymers by Pushing Down the Limit of Resolution,” Trends in Fabrication of Polymers and Polymer Composites, pp.1–3, 2022.
34. A.Kumar, A.Parihar, S. N. Basha, and U. Panda, “Clinically available/under trial drugs and vaccines for treatment of SARS-COV-2,” in Computational Approaches for Novel Therapeutic and Diagnostic Designing to Mitigate SARS-CoV2 Infection, Elsevier, 2022, pp.451–488.
35. M.Niinomi, Metals for biomedical devices. 2019.
36. Z.Zhang, N.Yin, S.Chen, and C.Liu, “Tribo-informatics: Concept, architecture, and case study,” Friction, vol. 9, pp.642–655, 2021.
37. Y.Subramanian, V. R, M.Ali S.A., A.Kumar, and etal., “Articial Intelligence Technique Based Performance Estimation of Solid Oxide Fuel Cells,” in International Conference
on Nanoelectronics, Nanophotonics, Nanomaterials, Nanobioscience \& Nanotechnology, Mangalam college of Engineering, Kottayam, Kerala, 2021.
38. A.Kumar, S.Datta, and D.Kalyanasundaram, “Liquid slippage in conned ows: Effect of periodic micropatterns of arbitrary pitch and amplitude,” in ASME 2016 5th International Conference on Micro/Nanoscale Heat and Mass Transfer, MNHMT 2016, 2016, vol. 1.
39. A.Kumar, A.K. Shrama, T.V. K.Gupta, and J.K. Katiyar, “Inuence of hexagonal boron nitride additive nanocutting uid on the machining of AA6061-T6 alloy using minimum quality lubrication,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part E: Journal of Process Mechanical Engineering, p.09544089221110980, 2022.
40. Y. Subramanian et al., “Structural, Photoabsorption and Photocatalytic Characteristics of BiFeO3-WO3 Nanocomposites: An Attempt to Validate the Experimental Data Through SVM-Based Articial Intelligence (AI),” Journal of Electronic Materials, pp.1–11, 2023.
41. M.Singh, A.Kumar, and A.R. Khan, “Capillary as a liquid diode,” Physical Review Fluids, vol. 5, no. 10, p.102101, 2020.
42. A.Kumar, A.K. Sharma, and J.K. Katiyar, “State-of-the-Art in Sustainable Machining of Different Materials Using Nano Minimum Quality Lubrication (NMQL),” Lubricants, vol. 11, no. 2, p.64, 2023.
43. S. Kumar, R.K. Verma, A. Kumar, and V. K. Patel, “Importance of Chemically Treated Natural Fibers in the Fabrication of Natural Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites,” Trends in Fabrication of Polymers and Polymer Composites, pp.10–11, 2022.
44. R.K. Singh, A.Kumar, R.Kant, A.Gupta, E.Suresh, and S.Bhattacharya, “Design and fab­rication of 3-dimensional helical structures in polydimethylsiloxane for ow control applica­tions,” Microsystem Technologies, vol. 20, no. 1, pp.101–111, Jan. 2014.
45. S.Izman etal., “Surface Modication Techniques for Biomedical Grade of Titanium Alloys: Oxidation, Carburization and Ion Implantation Processes,” Titanium Alloys - Towards Achieving Enhanced Properties for Diversied Applications, 2012.
46. J. S. Lee, R. T. Hill, A. Chilkoti, and W. L. Murphy, Surface Patterning, Fourth Edi. Elsevier, 2020.
47. B. Derby, “Bioprinting: Inkjet printing proteins and hybrid cell-containing materials and structures,” Journal of Materials Chemistry, vol. 18, no. 47, pp.5717–5721, 2008.
48. R.S. Soumya Mandal, Ashish Kumar Gupta, Elena Echeverria, David N.McIlroy, Jonathan D.Poplawsky, “Laser-assisted nanofabrication of multielement complex oxide,” Materials & Design, vol. 220, p.110882, 2022.
49. A.K. Gupta, S.Gupta, S.Mandal, and R.Sachan, “Laser irradiation-induced nanoscale sur­face transformations in strontium titanate,” pp.1–12, 2022.
50. A. K. Gupta, S. Gupta, and R. Sachan, “Laser Irradiation Induced Atomic Structure Modications in Strontium Titanate,” JOM, 2021.
A. Kumar etal.