AccScience Publishing / IJB / Volume 9 / Issue 6 / DOI: 10.36922/ijb.0969
Cite this article
208
Download
1522
Views
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
REVIEW

3D printing and bioprinting in urology

Kun Liu1 Nan Hu2 Zhihai Yu1 Xinzhou Zhang2 Hualin Ma2* Huawei Qu3* Changshun Ruan3*
Show Less
1 Department of Urology, Three Gorges Hospital, Chongqing University, Chongqing, China
2 Department of Nephrology, Shenzhen People’s Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, China
3 Research Center for Human Tissue and Organs Degeneration, Institute of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Submitted: 21 May 2023 | Accepted: 4 July 2023 | Published: 10 August 2023
© 2023 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing with highly flexible fabrication offers unlimited possibilities to create complex constructs. With the addition of active substances such as biomaterials, living cells, and growth factors, 3D printing can be upgraded to 3D bioprinting, endowing fabricated constructs with biological functions. Urology, as one of the important branches of clinical medicine, covers a variety of organs in the human body, such as kidneys, bladder, urethra, and prostate. The urological organs are multi-tubular, heterogeneous, and anisotropic, bringing huge challenges to 3D printing and bioprinting. This review aims to summarize the development of 3D printing and bioprinting technologies in urology in the last decade based on the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) in the Web of Science Core Collection online database (Clarivate). First, we demonstrate the search strategies for published papers using the keywords such as “3D printing,” “3D bioprinting,” and “urology.” Then, eight common 3D printing technologies were introduced in detail with their characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages. Furthermore, the application of 3D printing in urology was explored, such as the fabrication of diseased organs for doctor–patient communication, surgical planning, clinical teaching, and the creation of customized medical devices. Finally, we discuss the exploration of 3D bioprinting to create in vitro bionic 3D environment models for urology. Overall, 3D printing provides the technical support for urology to better serve patients and aid teaching, and 3D bioprinting enables the clinical applications of fabricated constructs for the replacement and repair of urologically damaged organs in future.

Keywords
3D printing
Bioprinting
Urology
Funding
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program (Grant No. 2018YFA0703100), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 32122046), the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of CAS (Grant No. 2019350), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No. 2023M733668), the Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (2020A1515111190), the Shenzhen Fundamental Research Foundation (JCYJ20210324113001005), the Shenzhen Governmental Sustainable Development Fund (KCXFZ20201221173612034), the Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Kidney Diseases (ZDSYS201504301616234), and the Shenzhen Fund for Guangdong Provincial Highlevel Clinical Key Specialties (No. SZGSP001).
References
  1. Walker DA, Hedrick JL, Mirkin CA, 2019, Rapid, large-volume, thermally controlled 3D printing using a mobile liquid interface. Science, 366(6463): 360. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax1562

 

 

  1. Ligon SC, Liska R, Stampfl J, et al., 2017, Polymers for 3D printing and customized additive manufacturing. Chem Rev, 117(15): 10212–10290. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00074

 

 

  1. Skylar-Scott MA, Mueller J, Visser CW, et al., 2019, Voxelated soft matter via multimaterial multinozzle 3D printing. Nature, 575(7782): 330–335. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1736-8

 

 

  1. Ouyang L, Armstrong JPK, Lin Y, et al., 2020, Expanding and optimizing 3D bioprinting capabilities using complementary network bioinks. Sci Adv, 6(38): eabc5529. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc5529

 

 

  1. Bandyopadhyay A, Traxel KD, Bose S, 2021, Nature-inspired materials and structures using 3D Printing. Mater Sci Eng R-Rep, 145(2021): 100609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2021.100609

 

 

  1. Qu HW, Fu HY, Han ZY, et al., 2019, Biomaterials for bone tissue engineering scaffolds: A review. RSC Adv, 9(45): 26252–26262. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RA05214C

 

 

  1. Sun W, Starly B, Daly AC, et al., 2020, The bioprinting roadmap. Biofabrication, 12(2): 022002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab5158

 

 

  1. Qu HW, 2020, Additive manufacturing for bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Mater Today Commun, 24(101024): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101024

 

 

  1. Qu H, Han Z, Chen Z, et al., 2021, Fractal design boosts extrusion-based 3D printing of bone-mimicking radial-gradient scaffolds. Research, 2021(2021): 9892689. https://doi.org/10.34133/2021/9892689

 

 

  1. Chatterjee K, Ghosh TK, 2020, 3D printing of textiles: Potential roadmap to printing with fibers. Adv Mater, 32(4): 1902086. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201902086

 

 

  1. Lai J, Wang C, Wang M, 2021, 3D printing in biomedical engineering: Processes, materials, and applications. Appl Phys Rev, 8(2): 021322. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0024177

 

 

  1. Yang Y, Xu R, Wang C, et al., 2022, Recombinant human collagen-based bioinks for the 3D bioprinting of full-thickness human skin equivalent. Int J Bioprint, 8(4): 611. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v8i4.611

 

 

  1. Wu Y, Li M, Su H, et al., 2023, Up-to-date progress in bioprinting of bone tissue. Int J Bioprint, 9(1): 628. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v9i1.628

 

 

  1. Gao F, Xu ZY, Liang QF, et al., 2019, Osteochondral regeneration with 3D-printed biodegradable high-strength supramolecular polymer reinforced-gelatin hydrogel scaffolds. Adv Sci, 6(15): 12. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.201900867

 

 

  1. Lin ZF, Wu MM, He HM, et al., 2019, 3D printing of mechanically stable calcium-free alginate-based scaffolds with tunable surface charge to enable cell adhesion and facile biofunctionalization. Adv Funct Mater, 29(9): 1808439. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201808439

 

 

  1. Chen MY, Skewes J, Desselle M, et al., 2020, Current applications of three-dimensional printing in urology. BJU Int, 125(1): 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14928

 

 

  1. Agung NP, Nadhif MH, Irdam GA, et al., 2021, The role of 3D-printed phantoms and devices for organ-specified appliances in urology. Int J Bioprint, 7(2): 333. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v7i2.333

 

 

  1. Colaco M, Igel DA , Atala A, 2018, The potential of 3D printing in urological research and patient care. Nat Rev Urol, 15(4): 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2018.6

 

 

  1. Ngo TD, Kashani A, Imbalzano G, et al., 2018, Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Compos B Eng, 143(2018): 172–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012

 

 

  1. Mondschein RJ, Kanitkar A, Williams CB, et al., 2017, Polymer structure-property requirements for stereolithographic 3D printing of soft tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomaterials, 140(2017): 170–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.06.005

 

 

  1. Hwa LC, Rajoo S, Noor AM, et al., 2017, Recent advances in 3D printing of porous ceramics: A review. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci, 21(6): 323–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2017.08.002

 

 

  1. Kuang X, Wu JT, Chen KJ, et al., 2019, Grayscale digital light processing 3D printing for highly functionally graded materials. Sci Adv, 5(5): eaav5790. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav5790

 

 

  1. Shao HF, Ke XR, Liu A, et al., 2017, Bone regeneration in 3D printing bioactive ceramic scaffolds with improved tissue/ material interface pore architecture in thin-wall bone defect. Biofabrication, 9(2): 12. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/aa663c

 

 

  1. Butscher A, Bohner M, Hofmann S, et al., 2011, Structural and material approaches to bone tissue engineering in powder-based three-dimensional printing. Acta Biomater, 7(3): 907–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.09.039

 

 

  1. Mousavi S, Howard D, Zhang F, et al., 2020, Direct 3D printing of highly anisotropic, flexible, constriction-resistive sensors for multidirectional proprioception in soft robots. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 12(13): 15631–15643. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b21816

 

 

  1. Huang K, Dong S, Yang J, et al., 2019, Three-dimensional printing of a tunable graphene-based elastomer for strain sensors with ultrahigh sensitivity. Carbon, 143(2019): 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2018.11.008

 

 

  1. Jiang Z, Diggle B, Tan ML, et al., 2020, Extrusion 3D printing of polymeric materials with advanced properties. Adv Sci, 7(17): 2001379. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202001379

 

 

  1. Nan B, Galindo-Rosales FJ, Ferreira JMF, 2020, 3D printing vertically: Direct ink writing free-standing pillar arrays. Mater Today, 35(2020): 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2020.01.003

 

 

  1. Lewis JA, 2006, Direct ink writing of 3D functional materials. Adv Funct Mater, 16(17): 2193–2204. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.200600434

 

 

  1. Ravichandran D, Xu W, Kakarla M, et al., 2021, Multiphase direct ink writing (MDIW) for multilayered polymer/ nanoparticle composites. Addit Manuf, 47(2021): 102322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102322

 

 

  1. Nommeots-Nomm A, Lee PD, Jones JR, 2018, Direct ink writing of highly bioactive glasses. J Eur Ceram Soc, 38(3): 837–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2017.08.006

 

 

  1. He YF, Zhang F, Saleh E, et al., 2017, A tripropylene glycol diacrylate-based polymeric support ink for material jetting. Addit Manuf, 16(2017): 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.06.001

 

 

  1. Brunello G, Sivolella S, Meneghello R, et al., 2016, Powder-based 3D printing for bone tissue engineering. Biotechnol Adv, 34(5): 740–753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.03.009

 

 

  1. Miyanaji H, Zhang S , Yang L, 2018, A new physics-based model for equilibrium saturation determination in binder jetting additive manufacturing process. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 124(2018): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2017.09.001

 

 

  1. Zhou Z, Lennon A, Buchanan F, et al., 2020, Binder jetting additive manufacturing of hydroxyapatite powders: Effects of adhesives on geometrical accuracy and green compressive strength. Addit Manuf, 36(2020):101645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101645

 

 

  1. Du YY, Liu HM, Yang Q, et al., 2017, Selective laser sintering scaffold with hierarchical architecture and gradient composition for osteochondral repair in rabbits. Biomaterials, 137(2017): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.05.021

 

 

  1. Wu H, Wang O, Tian Y, et al., 2020, Selective laser sintering-based 4D printing of magnetism-responsive grippers. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 13(11): 12679–12688. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c17429

 

 

  1. Warnke PH, Douglas T, Wollny P, et al., 2009, Rapid prototyping: Porous titanium alloy scaffolds produced by selective laser melting for bone tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part C-Methods, 15(2): 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tec.2008.0288

 

 

  1. Han CJ, Yan CZ, Wen SF, et al., 2017, Effects of the unit cell topology on the compression properties of porous Co- Cr scaffolds fabricated via selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J, 23(1): 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1108/rpj-08-2015-0114

 

 

  1. Xiong Y-Z, Gao R-N, Zhang H, et al., 2020, Rationally designed functionally graded porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds with high strength and toughness built via selective laser melting for load-bearing orthopedic applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 104(2020): 103673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103673

 

 

  1. Liang HX, Yang YW, Xie DQ, et al., 2019, Trabecular-like Ti-6Al-4V scaffolds for orthopedic: Fabrication by selective laser melting and in vitro biocompatibility. J Mater Sci Technol, 35(7): 1284–1297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.01.012

 

 

  1. Kinstlinger IS, Saxton SH, Calderon GA, et al., 2020, Generation of model tissues with dendritic vascular networks via sacrificial laser-sintered carbohydrate templates. Nat Biomed Eng, 4(9): 916–932. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-020-0566-1

 

 

  1. Mao M, Qu X, Zhang Y, et al., 2023, Leaf-venation-directed cellular alignment for macroscale cardiac constructs with tissue-like functionalities. Nat Commun, 14(1): 2077. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-37716-1

 

 

  1. Brassard JA, Nikolaev M, Hübscher T, et al., 2021, Recapitulating macro-scale tissue self-organization through organoid bioprinting. Nat Mater, 20(1): 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-020-00803-5

 

 

  1. Koons GL, Diba M, Mikos AG, 2020, Materials design for bone-tissue engineering. Nat Rev Mater, 5(8): 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-0204-2

 

 

  1. Liu H, Du Y, St-Pierre J-P, et al., 2020, Bioenergetic-active materials enhance tissue regeneration by modulating cellular metabolic state. Sci Adv, 6(13): eaay7608. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay7608

 

 

  1. McDermott Anna M, Herberg S, Mason Devon E, et al., 2019, Recapitulating bone development through engineered mesenchymal condensations and mechanical cues for tissue regeneration. Sci Transl Med, 11(495): eaav7756. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aav7756

 

 

  1. Saba P, Melnyk R, Holler T, et al., 2021, Comparison of multi-parametric MRI of the prostate to 3D prostate computer aided designs and 3D-printed prostate models for pre-operative planning of radical prostatectomies: A pilot study. Urology, 158(2021): 150–155.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.08.031

 

 

  1. Chandak P, Byrne N, Lynch H, et al., 2018, Three-dimensional printing in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy - an Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) Phase 2a study. BJU Int, 122(3): 360–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14189

 

 

  1. Ebbing J, Jäderling F, Collins JW, et al., 2018, Comparison of 3D printed prostate models with standard radiological information to aid understanding of the precise location of prostate cancer: A construct validation study. PLoS One, 13(6): e0199477. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199477

 

 

  1. Cacciamani GE, Okhunov Z, Meneses AD, et al., 2019, Impact of three-dimensional printing in urology: state of the art and future perspectives. A systematic review by ESUT-YAUWP Group. Eur Urol, 76(2): 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.044

 

 

  1. Ghazi AE, Teplitz BA, 2020, Role of 3D printing in surgical education for robotic urology procedures. Transl Androl Urol, 9(2): 931–941. https://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/35484

 

 

  1. del Junco M, Okhunov Z, Yoon R, et al., 2014, Development and initial porcine and cadaver experience with three-dimensional printing of endoscopic and laparoscopic equipment. J Endourol, 29(1): 58–62. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0280

 

 

  1. Park C-J, Kim H-W, Jeong S, et al., 2015, Anti-reflux ureteral stent with polymeric flap valve using three-dimensional printing: An in vitro study. J Endourol, 29(8): 933–938. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2015.0154

 

 

  1. Lee J, Sung J, Ki JJ, et al., 2022, 3D-printing-assisted extraluminal anti-reflux diodes for preventing vesicoureteral reflux through double-J stents. Int J Bioprint, 8(2): 549. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v8i2.549

 

 

  1. Yoon J, Singh NK, Jang J, et al., 2022, 3D bioprinted in vitro secondary hyperoxaluria model by mimicking intestinal-oxalate-malabsorption-related kidney stone disease. Appl Phys Rev, 9(4): 041408. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0087345

 

 

  1. Pichler R, Rizzo L, Tröndle K, et al., 2022, Tuning the 3D microenvironment of reprogrammed tubule cells enhances biomimetic modeling of polycystic kidney disease. Biomaterials, 291(2022): 121910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121910

 

 

  1. Liu C, Campbell SB, Li J, et al., 2022, High throughput omnidirectional printing of tubular microstructures from elastomeric polymers. Adv Healthc Mater, 11(23): 2201346. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.202201346

 

 

  1. Kim JH, Choi J, Kim M, et al., 2022, Immunotherapeutic effects of recombinant Bacillus Calmette–Guérin containing sic gene in ex vivo and in vivo bladder cancer models. Investig Clin Urol, 63(2): 228–237. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20210425

 

 

  1. Lee S, Kim JH, Kang SJ, et al., 2022, Customized multilayered tissue-on-a-chip (MToC) to simulate Bacillus Calmette– Guérin (BCG) immunotherapy for bladder cancer treatment. BioChip J, 16(1): 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13206-022-00047-2

 

 

  1. Chae S, Kim J, Yi H-G, et al., 2022, 3D bioprinting of an in vitro model of a biomimetic urinary bladder with a contract-release system. Micromachines, 13(2): 277. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13020277

 

 

  1. Wu D, Berg J, Arlt B, et al., 2022, Bioprinted cancer model of neuroblastoma in a renal microenvironment as an efficiently applicable drug testing platform. Int J Mol Sci, 23(1): 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23010122

 

 

  1. Sobreiro-Almeida R, Gomez-Florit M, Quinteira R, et al., 2021, Decellularized kidney extracellular matrix bioinks recapitulate renal 3D microenvironment in vitro. Biofabrication, 13(4): 17. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ac0fca

 

 

  1. Kim JH, Lee S, Kang SJ, et al., 2021, Establishment of three-dimensional bioprinted bladder cancer-on-a-chip with a microfluidic system using Bacillus Calmette-Guerin. Int J Mol Sci, 22(16): 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22168887

 

 

  1. Trondle K, Rizzo L, Pichler R, et al., 2021, Scalable fabrication of renal spheroids and nephron-like tubules by bioprinting and controlled self-assembly of epithelial cells. Biofabrication, 13(3): 16. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/abe185

 

 

  1. Serex L, Sharma K, Rizov V, et al., 2021, Microfluidic-assisted bioprinting of tissues and organoids at high cell concentrations. Biofabrication, 13(2): 025006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/abca80

 

 

  1. Lawlor KT, Vanslambrouck JM, Higgins JW, et al., 2021, Cellular extrusion bioprinting improves kidney organoid reproducibility and conformation. Nat Mater, 20(2): 260–271. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-020-00853-9

 

 

  1. Xie R, Korolj A, Liu C, et al., 2020, h-FIBER: Microfluidic topographical hollow fiber for studies of glomerular filtration barrier. ACS Central Sci, 6(6): 903–912. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.9b01097

 

 

  1. Sämfors S, Karlsson K, Sundberg J, et al., 2019, Biofabrication of bacterial nanocellulose scaffolds with complex vascular structure. Biofabrication, 11(4): 045010.https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab2b4f

 

 

  1. Ali M, Pr AK, Yoo JJ, et al., 2019, A photo-crosslinkable kidney ECM-derived bioink accelerates renal tissue formation. Adv Healthc Mater, 8(7): 1800992. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.201800992

 

 

  1. Lin NYC, Homan KA, Robinson SS, et al., 2019, Renal reabsorption in 3D vascularized proximal tubule models. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 116(12): 5399–5404. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1815208116

 

 

  1. Jansen K, Castilho M, Aarts S, et al., 2019, Fabrication of kidney proximal tubule grafts using biofunctionalized electrospun polymer scaffolds. Macromol Biosci, 19(2): 1800412. https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.201800412

 

 

  1. Imamura T, Shimamura M, Ogawa T, et al., 2018, Biofabricated structures reconstruct functional urinary bladders in radiation-injured rat bladders. Tissue Eng Part A, 24(21–22): 1574–1587. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tea.2017.0533

 

 

  1. Pi Q, Maharjan S, Yan X, et al., 2018, Digitally tunable microfluidic bioprinting of multilayered cannular tissues. Adv Mater, 30(43): 1706913. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201706913

 

 

  1. Liang Q, Gao F, Zeng Z, et al., 2020, Coaxial scale-up printing of diameter-tunable biohybrid hydrogel microtubes with high strength, perfusability, and endothelialization. Adv Funct Mater, 30(43): 2001485. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202001485

 

 

  1. Xu Z, Fan C, Zhang Q, et al., 2021, A self-thickening and self-strengthening strategy for 3D printing high-strength and antiswelling supramolecular polymer hydrogels as meniscus substitutes. Adv Funct Mater, 31(18): 2100462. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202100462

 

 

  1. Gong J, Schuurmans CCL, Genderen AMv, et al., 2020, Complexation-induced resolution enhancement of 3D-printed hydrogel constructs. Nat Commun, 11(1): 1267. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14997-4

 

 

  1. Park S, Yuk H, Zhao R, et al., 2021, Adaptive and multifunctional hydrogel hybrid probes for long-term sensing and modulation of neural activity. Nat Commun, 12(1): 3435. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23802-9

 

 

  1. Fan W, Shan C, Guo H, et al., 2022, Dual-gradient enabled ultrafast biomimetic snapping of hydrogel materials. Sci Adv, 5(4): eaav7174. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav7174

 

 

  1. Duraivel S, Laurent D, Rajon DA, et al., 2023, A silicone-based support material eliminates interfacial instabilities in 3D silicone printing. Science, 379(6638): 1248–1252. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade4441

 

 

  1. Zhao S, Siqueira G, Drdova S, et al., 2020, Additive manufacturing of silica aerogels. Nature, 584(7821): 387–392. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2594-0

 

 

  1. Xu J, Zhang X, Liu Y, et al., 2020, Selective coaxial ink 3D printing for single-pass fabrication of smart elastomeric foam with embedded stretchable sensor. Addit Manuf, 36(2020): 101487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101487

 

 

  1. Cooke MN, Fisher JP, Dean D, et al., 2003, Use of stereolithography to manufacture critical-sized 3D biodegradable scaffolds for bone ingrowth. J Biomed Mater Res Part B-Appl Biomater, 64B(2): 65–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.10485

 

 

  1. Wang Z, Huang CZ, Wang J, et al., 2019, Development of a novel aqueous hydroxyapatite suspension for stereolithography applied to bone tissue engineering. Ceram Int, 45(3): 3902–3909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.11.063

 

 

  1. Caprioli M, Roppolo I, Chiappone A, et al., 2021, 3D-printed self-healing hydrogels via digital light processing. Nat Commun, 12(1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22802-z

 

 

  1. Chen Z, Yang M, Ji M, et al., 2021, Recyclable thermosetting polymers for digital light processing 3D printing. Mater Des, 197(2021): 109189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109189

 

 

  1. Mazzoli A, Ferretti C, Gigante A, et al., 2015, Selective laser sintering manufacturing of polycaprolactone bone scaffolds for applications in bone tissue engineering. Rapid Prototyp J, 21(4): 386–392. https://doi.org/10.1108/rpj-04-2013-0040

 

 

  1. Liu C, Yan D, Tan J, et al., 2020, Development and experimental validation of a hybrid selective laser melting and CNC milling system. Addit Manuf, 36(2020): 101550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101550

 

 

  1. Hu Y, Chen H, Liang X, et al., 2021, Microstructure and biomechanical properties in selective laser melting of porous metal implants. 3D Print Addit Manuf, 0(0): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2021.0150

 

 

  1. Buote NJ, Porter I, Dakin GF, 2022, 3D printed cannulas for use in laparoscopic surgery in feline patients: A cadaveric study and case series. Vet Surg, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.13849

 




Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interests
Share
Back to top
International Journal of Bioprinting, Electronic ISSN: 2424-8002 Print ISSN: 2424-7723, Published by AccScience Publishing