A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of the potential for bioprinting of different 3D printing technologies. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Additive manufacturing in medicine allows for customized product creation, but challenges in obtaining accurate cell viability hinder progress.
  • This study compares the printability of hydrogels and thermoplastics in 3D bioprinting to create biomimetic structures, emphasizing the need for effective material analysis.
  • Results revealed that only 5% gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) successfully produced accurate biomimetic models, indicating that hydrogels still require improvement to compete with thermoplastic performance in bioprinting.

Article Abstract

26Additive manufacturing technologies offer a multitude of medical applications due to the advances in the development of the materials used to reproduce customized model products. The main problem with these technologies is obtaining the correct cell viability values, and it is where three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting emerges as a very interesting tool that should be studied extensively, as it has significant disadvantages with respect to printability. In this work, the comparison of 3D bioprinting technology in hydrogels and thermoplastics for the development of biomimetic parts is proposed. To this end, the study of the printability of different materials widely used in the literature is proposed, to subsequently test and analyze the parameters that indicate whether these materials could be used to obtain a biomimetic structure with structural guarantees. In order to analyze the materials studied, different tools have been designed to facilitate the quantitative characterization of their printability using 3D printing. For this purpose, different structures have been developed and a characterization methodology has been followed to quantify the printability value of each material in each test to subsequently discard the materials that do not obtain a minimum value in the result. After the study, it was found that only gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) 5% could generate biomimetic structures faithful to the designed 3D model. Furthermore, by comparing the printing results of the different materials used in 3D bioprinting and consequently establishing the approach of different strategies, it is shown that hydrogels need to be further developed to match the results achieved by thermoplastic materials used for bioprinting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10236351PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.18063/ijb.680DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

materials bioprinting
8
materials
7
bioprinting
5
comparison potential
4
potential bioprinting
4
bioprinting printing
4
printing technologies
4
technologies 26additive
4
26additive manufacturing
4
manufacturing technologies
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!