Design and fused deposition modeling of triply periodic minimal surface scaffolds with channels and hydrogel for breast reconstruction
3D-printed scaffolds that forge a new path for regenerative medicine are widely used in breast reconstruction due to their personalized shape and adjustable mechanical properties. However, the elastic modulus of present breast scaffolds is significantly higher than that of native breast tissue, leading to insufficient stimulation for cell differentiation and tissue formation. In addition, the lack of a tissue-like environment results in breast scaffolds being difficult to promote cell growth. This paper presents a geometrically new scaffold, featuring a triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) that ensures structural stability and multiple parallel channels that can modulate elastic modulus as required. The geometrical parameters for TPMS and parallel channels were optimized to obtain ideal elastic modulus and permeability through numerical simulations. The topologically optimized scaffold integrated with two types of structures was then fabricated using fused deposition modeling. Finally, the poly (ethylene glycol) diacrylate/gelatin methacrylate hydrogel loaded with human adipose-derived stem cells was incorporated into the scaffold by perfusion and ultraviolet curing for improvement of the cell growth environment. Compressive experiments were also performed to verify the mechanical performance of the scaffold, demonstrating high structural stability, appropriate tissue-like elastic modulus (0.2 – 0.83 MPa), and rebound capability (80% of the original height). In addition, the scaffold exhibited a wide energy absorption window, offering reliable load buffering capability. The biocompatibility was also confirmed by cell live/dead staining assay.
1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram S, et al., 2018, Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 68: 394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492
2. Chen Y, Liu Y, Zhang J, et al., 2021, Three-dimensional bioprinting adipose tissue and mammary organoids feasible for artificial breast structure regeneration. Mater Des, 200: 109467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109467
3. Malloy KM, Hilibrand S, 2002, Autograft versus allograft in degenerative cervical disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res,394: 27–38.
4. Liao Z, Wang CH, Cui WL, 2016, Comparison of allograft and autograft in lumbar fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: A systematic review. J Invest Surg, 29: 373–382. https://doi.org/10.3109/08941939.2016.1166534
5. Pouzet L, Hotton J, François C, 2022, Breast reconstruction with silicone prosthesis and acellular dermal matrix of porcine origin: Retrospective study of 84 cases. Ann Chir Plast Esthét, 67: 133–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anplas.2022.03.001
6. Lenne A, Defourny L, Lafosse A, et al., 2016, Breast prosthesis infection and pets: A case report and review of the literature. Int J Surg Case Rep, 22: 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.03.034
7. González FM, Alarza FH, Aguirre MP, 2018, Lung siliconoma, a rare complication of breast prosthesis rupture. Arch Bronconeumol (Engl Ed), 54: 580–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arbres.2018.02.019
8. Chen F, Ekinci A, Li L, et al., 2021, How do the printing parameters of fused filament fabrication and structural voids influence the degradation of biodegradable devices? Acta Biomater, 136: 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2021.09.020
9. Ekinci A, Gleadall A, Johnson AA, et al., 2021, Mechanical and hydrolytic properties of thin polylactic acid films by fused filament fabrication. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 114: 104217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104217
10. Ekinci A, Johnson AA, Gleadall A, et al., 2020, Layer-dependent properties of materials extruded biodegradable polylactic acid. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 104: 103654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103654
11. Cano-Vicent A, Tambuwala MM, Hassan SS, et al., 2021, Fused deposition modelling: Current status, methodology, applications and future prospects. Addit Manuf, 47: 102378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102378
12. Penumakala PK, Santo J, Thomas A, 2020, A critical review on the fused deposition modeling of thermoplastic polymer composites. Compos Part B Eng, 201: 108336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108336
13. Daminabo SC, Goel S, Grammatikos SA, et al., 2020, FDM-based additive manufacturing (3D Printing): Techniques for polymer material systems. Mater Today, 16: 100248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100248
14. Li L, Zhu XL, Yang HY, et al., 2022, Phase-field model for drug release of water-swellable filaments for fused filament fabrication. Mol Pharm, 19: 2854–2867. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.2c00217
15. Cleversey C, Robinson M, Willerth SM, 2019, 3D printing breast tissue models: A review of past work and directions for future work. Micromachines, 10: 501. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi10080501
16. Mohseni M, Bas O, Castro NJ, et al. Additive biomanufacturing of scaffolds for breast reconstruction. Addit Manuf, 30: 100845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100845
17. Arif ZU, Khalid MY, Noroozi R, et al., 2022, Recent advances in 3D-printed polylactide and polycaprolactone-based biomaterials for tissue engineering applications. Int J Biol Macromol, 218: 930–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.07.140
18. Stefaniak K, Masek A, 2021, Green copolymers based on poly (lactic acid)-short review. Materials, 14: 5254. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14185254
19. Ramot Y, Haim-Zada M, Domb AJ, et al., 2016, Biocompatibility and safety of PLA and its copolymers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 107: 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.03.012
20. Da Silva DD, Kaduri M, Poley M, et al., 2018, Biocompatibility, biodegradation and excretion of polylactic acid (PLA) in medical implants and theranostic systems. Chem Eng J, 340: 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.01.010
21. Chhaya MP, Balmayor ER, Hutmacher DW, et al., 2016, Transformation of breast reconstruction via additive biomanufacturing. Sci Rep, 6: 28030.
22. She Y, Fan Z, Wang L, et al., 2021, 3D Printed biomimetic PCL Scaffold as framework interspersed with collagen for long segment tracheal replacement. Front Cell Dev Biol, 9: 629796. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.629796
23. Li H, Yin Y, Xiang Y, et al., 2020, A novel 3D printing PCL/ GelMA scaffold containing USPIO for MRI-guided bile duct repair. Biomed Mater, 15: 045004.
24. Guo W, Chen M, Wang Z, et al., 2021, 3D-printed cell-free PCL-MECM scaffold with biomimetic micro-structure and micro-environment to enhance in situ meniscus regeneration. Bioact Mater, 6: 3620–3633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.02.019
25. Jang CH, Koo YW, Kim GH, 2020, ASC/chondrocyte-laden alginate hydrogel/PCL hybrid scaffold fabricated using 3D printing for auricle regeneration. Carbohydr Polym, 248: 116776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.116776
26. Ishaug-Riley SL, Okun LE, Prado G, et al., 1999, Human articular chondrocyte adhesion and proliferation on synthetic biodegradable polymer films. Biomaterials, 20: 23–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00155-6
27. Yildirim ED, Ayan H, Vasilets VN, et al., 2008, Effect of dielectric barrier discharge plasma on the attachment and proliferation of osteoblasts cultured over poly(e-caprolactone) scaffolds. Plasma Processes Polym, 5: 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppap.200700041
28. Ho TC, Chang CC, Chan HP, et al., Hydrogels: Properties and application in biomedicine. Molecules, 27: 2902. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27092902
29. Correa S, Grosskopf AK, Hernandez HL, et al., 2021, Translational applications of hydrogels. Chem Rev, 121: 11385–11457. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01177
30. Wang YH, Cao XF, Ma M, et al., 2020, A GelMA-PEGDA-nHA composite hydrogel for bone tissue engineering. Materials, 13: 3735. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13173735
31. Yuan M, Liu K, Jiang T, et al., 2022, GelMA/PEGDA microneedles patch loaded with HUVECs-derived exosomes and Tazarotene promote diabetic wound healing. J Nanobiotechnol, 20: 147. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-022-01354-4
32. Meng Z, He J, Cai Z, et al., 2020, Design and additive manufacturing of flexible polycaprolactone scaffolds with highly-tunable mechanical properties for soft tissue engineering. Mater Des, 189: 108508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108508
33. Jain S, Yassin MA, Fuoco T, et al., 2021, Understanding of how the properties of medical grade lactide based copolymer scaffolds influence adipose tissue regeneration: Sterilization and a systematic in vitro assessment. Mater Sci Eng C, 124: 112020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2021.112020
34. Krouskop TA, Wheeler TM, Kallel F, et al., 1998, Elastic moduli of breast and prostate tissues under compression. Ultrasonic Imaging, 20: 260–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/016173469802000403
35. Umesh V, Rape AD, Ulrich TA, et al., 2014, Microenvironmental stiffness enhances glioma cell proliferation by stimulating epidermal growth factor receptor signaling. PLoS One, 9: 101771. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101771
36. Hla C, Aa A, May B, et al., Computational and experimental characterization of 3D-printed PCL structures toward the design of soft biological tissue scaffolds. Mater Des, 188: 108488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108488
37. Zhou MR, Hou JF, Zhang G, et al., 2019, Tuning the mechanics of 3D-printed scaffolds by crystal lattice-like structural design for breast tissue engineering. Biofabrication, 12: 15023–15023.
38. Chhaya MP, Melchels FP, Holzapfel BM, et al., 2015, Sustained regeneration of high-volume adipose tissue for breast reconstruction using computer aided design and biomanufacturing. Biomaterials, 52: 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.01.025
39. Baptista R, Guedes M, Pereira MF, et al., 2020, On the effect of design and fabrication parameters on mechanical performance of 3D printed PLA scaffolds. Bioprinting, 20: e00096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00096
40. Meng ZJ, He JK, Li DC, 2021, Additive manufacturing and large deformation responses of highly-porous polycaprolactone scaffolds with helical architectures for breast tissue engineering. Virtual Phys Prototyp, 16: 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2021.1930069
41. Bobbert FS, Lietaert K, Eftekhari AA, et al. Additively manufactured metallic porous biomaterials based on minimal surfaces: A unique combination of topological, mechanical, and mass transport properties. Acta Biomater, 53: 572–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.02.024
42. Ma S, Tang Q, Feng Q, et al., 2019, Mechanical behaviours and mass transport properties of bone-mimicking scaffolds consisted of gyroid structures manufactured using selective laser melting. J Mechan Behav Biomed Mater, 93: 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.01.023
43. Al-Ketan O, Al-Rub RK, 2021, MSLattice: A free software for generating uniform and graded lattices based on triply periodic minimal surfaces. Mater Des Processing Commun, 3: e205. https://doi.org/10.1002/mdp2.205
44. Farazin A, Aghdam HA, Motififard M, et al., 2019, A polycaprolactone bio-nanocomposite bone substitute fabricated for femoral fracture approaches: Molecular dynamic and micro-mechanical investigation. J Nanoanalysis, 6: 172–184.
45. Williams JM, Adewunmi A, Schek RM, et al., 2005, Bone tissue engineering using polycaprolactone scaffolds fabricated via selective laser sintering. Biomaterials, 23: 4817–4827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.11.057
46. Lu L, Zhang Q, Wootton DM, et al., 2014, Mechanical study of polycaprolactone-hydroxyapatite porous scaffolds created by porogen-based solid freeform fabrication method. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater, 12: 145. https://doi.org/10.5301/jabfm.5000163
47. Guyton AC, Scheel K, Murphree D, 1996, Interstitial fluid pressure: III. Its effect on resistance to tissue fluid mobility. Circ Res, 19: 412–419. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.RES.19.2.412
48. Reddy NP, Cochran G, 1981, Interstitial fluid flow as a factor in decubitus ulcer formation. J Biomech, 14: 879–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(81)90015-4
49. Chang KH, Liao HT, Chen JP, 2013, Preparation and characterization of gelation/hyaluronic acid cryogels for adipose tissue engineering: In vitro and in vivo studies. Acta Biomater, 9: 9012–9026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.06.046