Cargando…
Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing
Gelatine is a well-known and extensively studied biopolymer, widely used in recent decades to create biomaterials in many different ways, exploiting its molecular resemblance with collagen, the main constituent of the extra-cellular matrix, from which it is derived. Many have employed this biopolyme...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8915043/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35267859 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14051036 |
_version_ | 1784667913154723840 |
---|---|
author | Montanari, Margherita Sangiorgi, Alex Campodoni, Elisabetta Bassi, Giada Gardini, Davide Montesi, Monica Panseri, Silvia Sanson, Alessandra Tampieri, Anna Sandri, Monica |
author_facet | Montanari, Margherita Sangiorgi, Alex Campodoni, Elisabetta Bassi, Giada Gardini, Davide Montesi, Monica Panseri, Silvia Sanson, Alessandra Tampieri, Anna Sandri, Monica |
author_sort | Montanari, Margherita |
collection | PubMed |
description | Gelatine is a well-known and extensively studied biopolymer, widely used in recent decades to create biomaterials in many different ways, exploiting its molecular resemblance with collagen, the main constituent of the extra-cellular matrix, from which it is derived. Many have employed this biopolymer in tissue engineering and chemically modified (e.g., gelatin methacryloyl) or blended it with other polymers (e.g., alginate) to modulate or increase its performances and printability. Nevertheless, little is reported about its use as a stand-alone material. Moreover, despite the fact that multiple works have been reported on the realization of mould-casted and three-dimensional printed scaffolds in tissue engineering, a clear comparison among these two shaping processes, towards a comparable workflow starting from the same material, has never been published. Herein, we report the use of gelatine as stand-alone material, not modified, blended, or admixed to be processed or crosslinked, for the realization of suitable scaffolds for tissue engineering, towards the two previously mentioned shaping processes. To make the comparison reliable, the same pre-process (e.g., the gelatin solution preparation) and post-process (e.g., freeze-drying and crosslinking) steps were applied. In this study, gelatine solution was firstly rheologically characterized to find a formulation suitable for being processed with both the shaping processes selected. The realized scaffolds were then morphologically, phisico-chemically, mechanically, and biologically characterized to determine and compare their performances. Despite the fact that the same starting material was employed, as well as the same pre- and post-process steps, the two groups resulted, for most aspects, in diametrically opposed characteristics. The mould-casted scaffolds that resulted were characterized by small, little-interconnected, and random porosity, high resistance to compression and slow cell colonization, while the three-dimensional printed scaffolds displayed big, well-interconnected, and geometrically defined porosity, high elasticity and recover ability after compression, as well as fast and deep cell colonization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8915043 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89150432022-03-12 Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing Montanari, Margherita Sangiorgi, Alex Campodoni, Elisabetta Bassi, Giada Gardini, Davide Montesi, Monica Panseri, Silvia Sanson, Alessandra Tampieri, Anna Sandri, Monica Polymers (Basel) Article Gelatine is a well-known and extensively studied biopolymer, widely used in recent decades to create biomaterials in many different ways, exploiting its molecular resemblance with collagen, the main constituent of the extra-cellular matrix, from which it is derived. Many have employed this biopolymer in tissue engineering and chemically modified (e.g., gelatin methacryloyl) or blended it with other polymers (e.g., alginate) to modulate or increase its performances and printability. Nevertheless, little is reported about its use as a stand-alone material. Moreover, despite the fact that multiple works have been reported on the realization of mould-casted and three-dimensional printed scaffolds in tissue engineering, a clear comparison among these two shaping processes, towards a comparable workflow starting from the same material, has never been published. Herein, we report the use of gelatine as stand-alone material, not modified, blended, or admixed to be processed or crosslinked, for the realization of suitable scaffolds for tissue engineering, towards the two previously mentioned shaping processes. To make the comparison reliable, the same pre-process (e.g., the gelatin solution preparation) and post-process (e.g., freeze-drying and crosslinking) steps were applied. In this study, gelatine solution was firstly rheologically characterized to find a formulation suitable for being processed with both the shaping processes selected. The realized scaffolds were then morphologically, phisico-chemically, mechanically, and biologically characterized to determine and compare their performances. Despite the fact that the same starting material was employed, as well as the same pre- and post-process steps, the two groups resulted, for most aspects, in diametrically opposed characteristics. The mould-casted scaffolds that resulted were characterized by small, little-interconnected, and random porosity, high resistance to compression and slow cell colonization, while the three-dimensional printed scaffolds displayed big, well-interconnected, and geometrically defined porosity, high elasticity and recover ability after compression, as well as fast and deep cell colonization. MDPI 2022-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8915043/ /pubmed/35267859 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14051036 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Montanari, Margherita Sangiorgi, Alex Campodoni, Elisabetta Bassi, Giada Gardini, Davide Montesi, Monica Panseri, Silvia Sanson, Alessandra Tampieri, Anna Sandri, Monica Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title | Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title_full | Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title_fullStr | Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title_full_unstemmed | Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title_short | Additive-Free Gelatine-Based Devices for Chondral Tissue Regeneration: Shaping Process Comparison among Mould Casting and Three-Dimensional Printing |
title_sort | additive-free gelatine-based devices for chondral tissue regeneration: shaping process comparison among mould casting and three-dimensional printing |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8915043/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35267859 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14051036 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT montanarimargherita additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT sangiorgialex additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT campodonielisabetta additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT bassigiada additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT gardinidavide additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT montesimonica additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT panserisilvia additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT sansonalessandra additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT tampierianna additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting AT sandrimonica additivefreegelatinebaseddevicesforchondraltissueregenerationshapingprocesscomparisonamongmouldcastingandthreedimensionalprinting |