Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering

Joint Journal of the German Society for Biomedical Engineering in VDE and the Austrian and Swiss Societies for Biomedical Engineering

Editor-in-Chief: Dössel, Olaf

Editorial Board: Augat, Peter / Buzug, Thorsten M. / Haueisen, Jens / Jockenhoevel, Stefan / Knaup-Gregori, Petra / Kraft, Marc / Lenarz, Thomas / Leonhardt, Steffen / Malberg, Hagen / Penzel, Thomas / Plank, Gernot / Radermacher, Klaus M. / Schkommodau, Erik / Stieglitz, Thomas / Urban, Gerald A.

1 Issue per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2364-5504
See all formats and pricing
More options …

3D printing of hydrogels in a temperature controlled environment with high spatial resolution

Benjamin Fischer / André Schulz / Michael M. Gepp / Julia Neubauer / Luca Gentile / Heiko Zimmermann
  • Corresponding author
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Biomedical Engineering, 66280 Sulzbach, Germany
  • Chair of molecular and cellular biotechnology, Saarland University; and Fraunhofer Institute for Biomedical Engineering, 66280 Sulzbach, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-09-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2016-0027

Abstract

There is great hope in 3D printing techniques to create patient specific scaffolds for therapeutic applications. The majority of these approaches rely on materials that both give support to cells and effectively mimic a tissue specific microenvironment. Hydrogels provide an exceptional support for cells but their physicochemical properties are not suited for conventional additive layer manufacturing. Their low viscosity and resulting fluidic nature inhibit voluminous 3D deposition and lead to crude printing accuracy. To enhance mechanical features, hydrogels are often chemically modified and/or mixed with additives; however it is not clear whether these changes induce effects on cellular behavior or if in vivo applications are at risk. Certainly it increases the complexity of scaffold systems. To circumvent these obstacles, we aimed for a 3D printing technique which is capable of creating scaffolds out of unmodified, pure hydrogels. Here we present a new method to produce alginate scaffolds in a viscosity- independent manner with high spatial resolution. This is achieved by printing in a sub-zero environment which leads to fast freezing of the hydrogels, thus preserving the printed shape and circumventing any viscosity dependent flows. This enables the user to create scaffolds which are able to reflect soft or stiff cell niches.

Keywords: additive layer manufacturing; alginate; 3D printing; scaffolds; sub-zero printing

1 Introduction

Hydrogels are the primary choice for many 3D bioprinting approaches. While they have many advantages on the biological side, especially their biocompatibility, tuneable stiffness and a wide range of possible modifications [1], [2], they are not well suited for additive layer manufacturing, due to their low viscosity and fluidic nature [3], [4]. An increase of the hydrogel concentration to counteract the low viscosity is problematic, because it would lead to stiffer hydrogels after gelling [5]. Therefore a very soft environment cannot be produced by additive layer manufacturing of pure hydrogels. Several studies showed that there are applications where such soft environment is needed, e.g. the directed differentiation of cells [6], [7]. Additionally with an ongoing increase of complexity in artificial grafts and a high demand for regenerative medicine, simple printing techniques are suited to strike market first. To retain flexibility and at the same time be as simple as possible, we developed a new method for production of alginate scaffolds with high spatial resolution based on a temperature controlled environment. Thus we are able to 3D print unmodified biopolymers without any additives in a viscosity range below 3 Pa*s, which is below the viscosity of maple syrup [8].

2 3D printing of hydrogels in a temperature controlled environment

We employed the 3D Bioscaffolder (GeSiM) for 3D printing of hydrogels. It offers two cartridges for sequential printing of two different materials. Pressures can be adjusted in 1 kPa steps. All scaffolds were produced using a 0.2 mm syringe opening at the end of cartridges and applying 30 kPa, 40 kPa or 50 kPa pressure. To control temperature we designed a metal container for dry ice, on which the scaffolds were printed. After surface reached a temperature between −15°C and −20°C (referred to as sub-zero temperatures in this study) scaffold production is started. We use ultra-high viscosity (UHV) alginate, a blend of biopolymers harvested from two brown algae species (Lessonia nigrescens and Lessonia trabeculata). These biopolymers exhibit high biocompatibility and are solidified through ionotropic gelling [1]. Along with alginate concentration, the type and concentration of ions are responsible for the stiffness in the final hydrogel construct, therefore offering a high flexibility in terms of mechanical features [5]. For this study we used 0.7% alginate solution (ALG1) with a viscosity of 2.8895 ± 0.0374 Pa*s (20°C). Alginate solutions in the 3D printer cartridges are kept at room temperature (20°C) and freeze rapidly only after being printed on the cooled stage. Imaging has been performed with FitC labeled Poly-l-lysine (Sigma Aldrich) stained scaffolds on a SP8 confocal laser scanning microscope (Leica).

3 Comparison between printing in sub-zero and room temperatures

For direct comparison of additive layer manufacturing either at sub-zero or room temperatures, we decided to print grids, because they show complex characteristics of the printing process. Particularly, they incorporate alternating patterns of overlaying and uncovered struts and additionally precision of strut deposition can be easily observed.

Printing of ALG1 utilizing conventional printing led to melting of struts orthogonal to the printing axis. This flow depends on the wettability of the surface and the volume of alginate deposited. These two factors combined with surface tension and viscosity of the alginate determine the final geometry. In our setup the resulting thickness is lower than 100 μm (Figure 1B).

Alginate strut printed with conventional 3D printing. (A) Shows a 1.5 mm × 1.5 mm part of an alginate scaffold. In contrast to our printing process the strut has a width of app. 1 mm. In depth coding clearly shows the evenness of the printed construct (scale in μm). White scale bar represents 500 μm. (B) Gives a side view of the strut, with a thickness below 150 μm.
Figure 1:

Alginate strut printed with conventional 3D printing. (A) Shows a 1.5 mm × 1.5 mm part of an alginate scaffold. In contrast to our printing process the strut has a width of app. 1 mm. In depth coding clearly shows the evenness of the printed construct (scale in μm). White scale bar represents 500 μm. (B) Gives a side view of the strut, with a thickness below 150 μm.

Furthermore, strut width is around 1 mm despite printing with a 0.2 mm syringe opening (Figure 1A and 2). Macropores, being the openings between printed struts, are also minimized owing to the outflow, especially from the crossing points, leading to a diminished accuracy. We have also observed a complete sealing of some macropores in each scaffold when printing at 50 kPa under room temperatures. Additionally, there seems to be almost no difference in height between overlaying areas and single printed struts, further underlying the effects of surface tension and wettability.

Comparison of strut width between alginate printed under sub-zero and temperate conditions. Struts have been documented under light microscopy, measurement of width has been realized with NiS Elements 4.0 software (Nikon). n = 30 for all samples, except for 50 kPa under room temperature n = 25.
Figure 2:

Comparison of strut width between alginate printed under sub-zero and temperate conditions. Struts have been documented under light microscopy, measurement of width has been realized with NiS Elements 4.0 software (Nikon). n = 30 for all samples, except for 50 kPa under room temperature n = 25.

In contrast, printing under sub-zero conditions is beneficial for a higher control over the printing process, higher printing pressures led to much lower differences in strut width, compared to non-freezing. Indicating that the difference is caused by higher material deposition in z-axis and thus creating a higher volume (Figure 2). Likewise, no increase in strut diameter variability is visible when applying higher pressures (Figure 2, 50 kPa).

Therefore, ALG1 printed in a sub-zero environment does not only result in a lower strut diameter in xy axis, it also enables the alginate to be printed with high strut diameter in z-axis (Figure 3A) The outflow is minimized, leading to a higher printing precision.

3D printed alginate at sub-zero temperatures. (A) Shows a 1.5 mm × 1.5 mm part of an alginate scaffold. Strut width is ∼500 μm. White scale bar represents 500 μm. In depth coding clearly shows the 3D nature of the construct (scale in μm). (B) Gives a side view of a scaffold, reaching a height of ∼300 μm with two printed layers.
Figure 3:

3D printed alginate at sub-zero temperatures. (A) Shows a 1.5 mm × 1.5 mm part of an alginate scaffold. Strut width is ∼500 μm. White scale bar represents 500 μm. In depth coding clearly shows the 3D nature of the construct (scale in μm). (B) Gives a side view of a scaffold, reaching a height of ∼300 μm with two printed layers.

4 Freezing effects on alginate

Freezing and vitrification have been shown to effect alginate morphology [9], [10]. Although we do not reach such deep temperatures as with liquid nitrogen, we still have observed structural changes of printed hydrogels. The surface is covered with microscale structures (Figure 4), compared to alginate printed at room temperature, which has an even surface (Figure 1). Pores have been observed, reaching as deep as 70 μm into the scaffold (Figure 2C). We speculated that these pores are the result of ice crystallization that penetrates the water rich hydrogels, as shown in other studies [11]. Microscale structures are known for their effect on cell attachment and behavior and could further enhance biomimicry of a cell niche [12], [13]. Additionally, they represent statistically random distributed structural patterns just as extra cellular matrices in physiological tissues do [14].

Detailed view of an alginate surface printed in a subzero environment (A, B and C). (A) Gives an overview over an alginate strut. Pores cover the whole surface. (B) Gives a detailed view of the porous surface marked with the white box in (A). (C) Shows a section following the white dashed line in (A). Here pores reaching deep into the struts are clearly visible (see white arrow). White scale bar represents 100 μm.
Figure 4:

Detailed view of an alginate surface printed in a subzero environment (A, B and C). (A) Gives an overview over an alginate strut. Pores cover the whole surface. (B) Gives a detailed view of the porous surface marked with the white box in (A). (C) Shows a section following the white dashed line in (A). Here pores reaching deep into the struts are clearly visible (see white arrow). White scale bar represents 100 μm.

5 Outlook

Printing in sub-zero environments enables the user to create hydrogel scaffolds with high spatial resolution. The possibility to print very low viscosity polymers facilitates the creation of very soft microenvironments. This is achieved without any modification of the used biopolymers. In conclusion, we designed a 3D printing method which has the capability to print soft and stiff parts in one scaffold. While 3D printing of soft and hard materials has been realized before, to our knowledge, none has achieved this with such liquid materials and high spatial resolution using only non-modified hydrogels.

Author’s Statement

Research funding: The author state no funding involved. Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest. Material and Methods: Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

References

  • [1]

    Zimmermann H, Zimmermann D, Reuss R, Feilen PJ, Manz B, Katsen A, et al. Towards a medically approved technology for alginate-based microcapsules allowing long-term immunoisolated transplantation. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16:491–501. Google Scholar

  • [2]

    Zimmermann H, Shirley SG, Zimmermann U. Alginate-based encapsulation of cells: past, present, and future. Curr Diab Rep. 2007;7:314–20. Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Cornock R, Beirne S, Thompson B, Wallace GG. Coaxial additive manufacture of biomaterial composite scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biofabrication. 2014;6:025002. Google Scholar

  • [4]

    Visser J, Melchels FP, Jeon JE, van Bussel EM, Kimpton LS, Byrne HM, et al. Reinforcement of hydrogels using three-dimensionally printed microfibres. Nat Commun. 2015;6:6933. Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Storz H, Müller KJ, Ehrhart F, Gómez I, Shirley SG, Gessner P, et al. Physicochemical features of ultra-high viscosity alginates. Carbohydr Res. 2009;344:985–95. Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Discher DE, Janmey P, Wang Y-l. Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science 2005;310:1139–43. Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Levental I, Georges PC, Janmey PA. “Soft biological materials and their impact on cell function,”. Soft Matter. 2007;2:1–9. Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Li X, Hu B, Ding J, Chen H. Rapid characterization of complex viscous samples at molecular levels by neutral desorption extractive electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Nat Protoc. 2011;6:1010–25. Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Katsen-Globa A, Meiser I, Petrenko YA, Ivanov RV, Lozinsky VI, Zimmermann H, et al. Towards ready-to-use 3-D scaffolds for regenerative medicine: adhesion-based cryopreservation of human mesenchymal stem cells attached and spread within alginate–gelatin cryogel scaffolds. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2013;25:857–71. Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Zmora S, Glicklis R, Cohen S. Tailoring the pore architecture in 3-D alginate scaffolds by controlling the freezing regime during fabrication. Biomaterials. 2002;23:4087–94. Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Annabi N, Nichol JW, Zhong X, Ji C, Koshy S, Khademhosseini A, et al. Controlling the porosity and microarchitecture of hydrogels for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2010;16:371–83. Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Heras-Bautista CO, Katsen-Globa A, Schloerer NE, Dieluweit S, Abd El Aziz OM, Peinkofer G, et al. The influence of physiological matrix conditions on permanent culture of induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Biomaterials 2014;35:7374–85. Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Yeung T, Georges PC, Flanagan LA, Marg B, Ortiz M, Funaki M, et al. Effects of substrate stiffness on cell morphology, cytoskeletal structure, and adhesion. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 2005;60:24–34. Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Martínez E, Engel E, Planell JA, Samitier J. Effects of artificial micro- and nano-structured surfaces on cell behaviour. Ann Anat. 2009;191:126–35. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-09-30

Published in Print: 2016-09-01


Citation Information: Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 109–112, ISSN (Online) 2364-5504, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2016-0027.

Export Citation

©2016 Heiko Zimmermann et al., licensee De Gruyter.. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. BY-NC-ND 4.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Hritwick Banerjee, Mohamed Suhail, and Hongliang Ren
Biomimetics, 2018, Volume 3, Number 3, Page 15
[2]
Scott Stratton, Ohan S. Manoukian, Ravi Patel, Adam Wentworth, Swetha Rudraiah, and Sangamesh G. Kumbar
Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2017, Page 45569

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in