Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
so researchers must take this into account and allow for proper integration without major mechanical
and biochemical disparities. Furthermore, many injuries that would benefit from a tissue-engineered so-
lution, such as osteochondral, ligament, and nerve damage, occur at the interface of two or more tissue
types. This means a fully successful implant must simultaneously support the growth of different cell
types and tissues, each with specific mechanical properties, chemical gradients, cell populations, and
specific geometric constraints incorporated within the scaffold design. The myriad of complex design
constraints limits the effectiveness of many current methods, especially when attempting to regenerate
clinically relevant injuries, organs, and other complex tissues and tissue interfaces.
To address the inherent limitations and requirements posed by the increased complexity of interfa-
cial tissue engineering, nanotechnologies (such as nanobiomaterials) are increasingly being utilized.
Nanobiomaterials clearly have played an integral role in tissue engineering, and will continue to be an
important design consideration for future work. The beauty of incorporating nanomaterials into tissue-
engineered constructs is the versatility they contribute almost intrinsically. Many nanomaterials add
similarly vast improvements to the constructs they are incorporated within. The cutting-edge of tissue
engineering and regenerative medicine research is moving toward customizing therapies to individual
patients and individual situations. In order for nanomaterials to be integrated into a patient-specific
scaffold, manufacturing techniques need to be employed to allow for further micro- and macroscale
customization; exactly what 3D printing excels at.
Now, with the introduction of 3D printing in the tissue engineering field, researchers can begin to
experience the benefits of having truly unique solutions to problems not easily solved with traditional
fabrication techniques. A robust hobbyist community and open-source movement, RepRap, has been
driving down the cost of implementation of many 3D printing technologies, making them available for
researchers and clinicians worldwide. This has made 3D printing technology readily available to the
research community, and thus 3D bioprinting has been advancing at an exciting pace. The successful
implementation of a scaffold with complex requirements, including the utilization of multiple disparate
materials and several nanomaterial constituents into a patient-specific geometry with highly defined
internal microgeometry, becomes surmountable. By incorporating multiple cell types, biomaterials,
and nanomaterials in specific, biomimetic geometries, tissue engineers can expect to develop truly
revolutionary medical devices, therapies, and treatments, and potentially usher in a new age of regen-
erative medicine.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the support of NIH Award Number UL1TR000075 from the NIH National Center
for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH Director's New Innovator Award, The George Washington Institute for
Biomedical Engineering (GWIBE), and GW Institute for Nanotechnology (GWIN).
REFERENCES
Search WWH ::
Custom Search