Review Open Access

A Review on Significant Role of Additive Manufacturing in Biomedical Applications

Advanced Materials & Sustainable Manufacturing. 2024, 1(1), 10002; https://doi.org/10.35534/amsm.2024.10002
Tanusree Bera *   
Laboratory for Advanced Research in Polymeric Materials (LARPM), School for Advanced Research in Petrochemicals, Centre Institute of Petrochemicals Engineering and Technology (CIPET), Bhubaneswar 751024, India
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 29 Nov 2023    Accepted: 08 Jan 2024    Published: 17 Jan 2024   

(This article belongs to the Topic Collection Sustainable Data-driven Intelligent Manufacturing Systems)

Abstract

The rapid development of manufacturing sector has created a platform for implementing novel technologies such as additive manufacturing (AM). AM or 3D printing, has generated a lot of interests in biomedical applications during the last decade with a variety of novel printed polymeric materials. 3D printing fabricates 3D object with layer-by-layer processing through computer-controlled programming software. It has innumerable applications including electronics, aerospace engineering, automobile industry, architecture and medical sectors. One of the most demanding sectors of 3D printing is biomedical engineering applications such as medicines, drug delivery system, surgical instruments, orthopedics, scaffolds, implants etc. The clinical ramifications of AM-made healthcare goods are being catalyzed by recent developments in biomaterials. This review paper aims to explain the concept of 3D printing and its significance in developing polymeric materials for biomedical applications. An inclusive survey has been conducted on the various techniques involved in printing the biomedical devices. The proper selection of polymeric materials is important for biomedical applications, especially from 3D printing point of view and this vital parameter has been considered in this review paper. According to our findings, more breakthroughs in biomaterials, are required for the success and expansion of AM technology in the biomedical applications.

References

1.
Sandeep B, Kannan TTM, Chandradass J, Ganesan M, Rajan AJ. Scope of 3D printing in manufacturing industries-A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 45, 6941–6945. [Google Scholar]
2.
Feng S, Kamat AM, Pei Y. Design and fabrication of conformal cooling channels in molds: Review and progress updates. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 2021, 171, 121082. [Google Scholar]
3.
Lynn R, Dinar M, Huang N, Collins J, Yu J, Greer C, et al. Direct digital subtractive manufacturing of a functional assembly using voxel-based models. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 2018, 140, 021006. [Google Scholar]
4.
Prakash KS, Nancharaih T, Rao VS. Additive manufacturing techniques in manufacturing-an overview. Mater. Today Proc. 2018, 5, 3873–3882. [Google Scholar]
5.
Stansbury JW, Idacavage MJ. 3D printing with polymers: Challenges among expanding options and opportunities. Dent. Mater. 2016, 32, 54–64. [Google Scholar]
6.
Kantaros A, Chatzidai N, Karalekas D. 3D printing-assisted design of scaffold structures. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 82, 559–571. [Google Scholar]
7.
El-Hajje A, Kolos EC, Wang JK, Maleksaeedi S, He Z, Wiria FE, et al. Physical and mechanical characterisation of 3D-printed porous titanium for biomedical applications. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2014, 25, 2471–2480. [Google Scholar]
8.
Kantaros A, Piromalis D. Fabricating lattice structures via 3D printing: The case of porous bio-engineered scaffolds. Appl. Mech. 2021, 2, 289–302. [Google Scholar]
9.
Kantaros A, Giannatsis J, Karalekas D. A novel strategy for the incorporation of optical sensors in Fused Deposition Modeling parts. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Manufacturing Engineering and Technologies, Stockolm, Sweden, 27–30 October 2013; pp. 163–170.
10.
Madrid APM, Vrech SM, Sanchez MA, Rodriguez AP. Advances in additive manufacturing for bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2019, 100, 631–644. [Google Scholar]
11.
Liska R, Schuster M, Inführ R, Turecek C, Fritscher C, Seidl B, et al. Photopolymers for rapid prototyping. J. Coat. Technol. Res. 2007, 4, 505–510. [Google Scholar]
12.
Bagheri A, Jin J. Photopolymerization in 3D printing. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. 2019, 1, 593–611. [Google Scholar]
13.
Stender B, Mantei W, Houbertz R. From Lab to Fab—High‐Precision 3D Printing: Towards high throughputs and industrial scalability. Laser Technik J. 2017, 14, 20–23. [Google Scholar]
14.
Kantaros A, Diegel O, Piromalis D, Tsaramirsis G, Khadidos AO, Khadidos AO, et al. 3D printing: Making an innovative technology widely accessible through makerspaces and outsourced services. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 49, 2712–2723. [Google Scholar]
15.
Tsaramirsis G, Kantaros A, Al-Darraji I, Piromalis D, Apostolopoulos C, Pavlopoulou A, et al. A modern approach towards an industry 4.0 model: From driving technologies to management. J. Sens. 2022, 2022, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
16.
Stender B, Hilbert F, Dupuis Y, Krupp A, Mantei W, Houbertz R. Manufacturing strategies for scalable high-precision 3D printing of structures from the micro to the macro range. Adv. Opt. Technol. 2019, 8, 225–231. [Google Scholar]
17.
Kantaros A, Piromalis D, Tsaramirsis G, Papageorgas P, Tamimi H. 3D printing and implementation of digital twins: current trends and limitations. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2021, 5, 7. [Google Scholar]
18.
Kantaros A, Ganetsos T, Piromalis D. 3D and 4D Printing as Integrated Manufacturing Methods of Industry 4.0. Am. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2023, 4, 12–22. [Google Scholar]
19.
Zhang J, Xiao P. 3D printing of photopolymers. Polym. Chem. 2018, 9, 1530–1540. [Google Scholar]
20.
Kiselevskiy MV, Anisimova NY, Kapustin AV, Ryzhkin AA, Kuznetsova DN, Polyakova VV, et al. Development of Bioactive Scaffolds for Orthopedic Applications by Designing Additively Manufactured Titanium Porous Structures: A Critical Review. Biomimetics 2023, 8, 546. [Google Scholar]
21.
Mirkhalaf M, Men Y, Wang R, No Y, Zreiqat H. Personalized 3D printed bone scaffolds: A review. Acta Biomater. 2023, 156, 110–124. [Google Scholar]
22.
Kantaros A. 3D Printing in Regenerative Medicine: Technologies and Resources Utilized. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 14621. [Google Scholar]
23.
Kantaros A. Bio-Inspired Materials: Exhibited Characteristics and Integration Degree in Bio-Printing Operations. Am. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2022, 15, 255–263. [Google Scholar]
24.
Kantaros A, Ganetsos T, Piromalis D. 4D Printing: Technology Overview and Smart Materials Utilized. J. Mechatron. Robot. 2023, 7, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
25.
Kantaros A, Soulis E, Ganetsos T, Petrescu FI. Applying a Combination of Cutting-Edge Industry 4.0 Processes towards Fabricating a Customized Component. Processes 2023, 11, 1385. [Google Scholar]
26.
Arif ZU, Khalid MY, Noroozi R, Hossain M, Shi HH, Tariq A, et al. Additive manufacturing of sustainable biomaterials for biomedical applications. Asian J. Pharm. Sci. 2023, 18, 100812. [Google Scholar]
27.
Kantaros A, Soulis E, Petrescu FI, Ganetsos T. Advanced Composite Materials Utilized in FDM/FFF 3D Printing Manufacturing Processes: The Case of Filled Filaments. Materials 2023, 16, 6210. [Google Scholar]
28.
Kantaros A, Ganetsos T. From Static to Dynamic: Smart Materials Pioneering Additive Manufacturing in Regenerative Medicine. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 15748. [Google Scholar]
29.
Elahinia MH, Hashemi M, Tabesh M, Bhaduri SB. Manufacturing and processing of NiTi implants: A review. Progr. Mater. Sci. 2012, 57, 911–946. [Google Scholar]
30.
Kruth JP, Levy G, Schindel R, Craeghs T, Yasa E. Consolidation of polymer powders by selective laser sintering. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Polymers and Moulds Innovations, Ghent, Belgium, September 2008; pp. 15–30.
31.
Ding S, Zou B, Wang P, Ding H. Effects of nozzle temperature and building orientation on mechanical properties and microstructure of PEEK and PEI printed by 3D-FDM. Polym. Test. 2019, 78, 105948. [Google Scholar]
32.
Gautam R, Singh RD, Sharma VP, Siddhartha R, Chand P, Kumar R. Biocompatibility of polymethylmethacrylate resins used in dentistry. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2012, 100, 1444–1450. [Google Scholar]
33.
Baumers M, Tuck C, Hague R. Selective heat sintering versus laser sintering: comparison of deposition rate, process energy consumption and cost performance. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA, 4–6 August 2014.
34.
Sanaei N, Fatemi A. Defects in additive manufactured metals and their effect on fatigue performance: A state-of-the-art review. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2021, 117, 100724. [Google Scholar]
35.
Dado D, Levenberg S. Cell–scaffold mechanical interplay within engineered tissue. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2009, 20, 656–664. [Google Scholar]
36.
Hoque ME, Chuan YL, Pashby I. Extrusion based rapid prototyping technique: an advanced platform for tissue engineering scaffold fabrication. Biopolymers 2012, 97, 83–93. [Google Scholar]
37.
Lin YH, Chuang TY, Chiang WH, Chen IW, Wang K, Shie MY, et al. The synergistic effects of graphene-contained 3D-printed calcium silicate/poly-ε-caprolactone scaffolds promote FGFR-induced osteogenic/angiogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2019, 104, 109887. [Google Scholar]
38.
Garreta E, Oria R, Tarantino C, Pla-Roca M, Prado P, Fernandez-Aviles F, et al. Tissue engineering by decellularization and 3D bioprinting. Mater. Today 2017, 20, 166–178. [Google Scholar]
39.
Kumar R, Kumar S. Trending applications of 3D printing: A study. Asian J. Eng. Appl. Technol. 2020, 9, 1–2. [Google Scholar]
40.
Milewski JO, Milewski JO. Trends in AM, government, industry, research, business. In Additive Manufacturing of Metals; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 255–292.
41.
Wu YH, Chiu YC, Lin YH, Ho CC, Shie MY, Chen YW. 3D-printed bioactive calcium silicate/poly-ε-caprolactone bioscaffolds modified with biomimetic extracellular matrices for bone regeneration. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 942. [Google Scholar]
42.
Huang KH, Chen YW, Wang CY, Lin YH, Wu YH, Shie MY, et al. Enhanced capability of bone morphogenetic protein 2–loaded mesoporous calcium silicate scaffolds to induce odontogenic differentiation of human dental pulp cells. J. Endod. 2018, 44, 1677–1685. [Google Scholar]
43.
Kumar L, Haleem A, Tanveer Q, Javaid M, Shuaib M, Kumar V. Rapid manufacturing: classification and recent development. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Sci. 2017, 4. doi:10.22161/ijaers.4.3.5.
44.
Kodama H. Automatic method for fabricating a three-dimensional plastic model with photo-hardening polymer. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1981, 52, 1770–1773. [Google Scholar]
45.
Gupta V, Nesterenko P, Paull B. An Introduction to 3D Printing 1.1. 3D Print. In 3D Printing in Chemical Sciences: Applications Across Chemistry; The Royal Society of Chemistry: London, UK, 2019; pp. 1–21.
46.
Bártolo PJ. Stereolithography: Materials, Processes and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011.
47.
Crump SS. Apparatus and method for creating three-dimensional objects, U.S. Patent No. 5,121,329, 1992.
48.
Chen JV, Dang AB, Dang A. Comparing cost and print time estimates for six commercially-available 3D printers obtained through slicing software for clinically relevant anatomical models. 3D Print. Med. 2021, 7, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
49.
Abdulhameed O, Al-Ahmari A, Ameen W, Mian SH. Additive manufacturing: Challenges, trends, and applications. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2019, 11. doi:10.1177/1687814018822880.
50.
Chua CK, Leong KF, Lim CS. Rapid Prototyping: Principles and Applications (With Companion CD-ROM); World Scientific Publishing Company: Singapore, 2010.
51.
Berretta S, Evans K, Ghita O. Additive manufacture of PEEK cranial implants: Manufacturing considerations versus accuracy and mechanical performance. Mater. Des. 2018, 139, 141–152. [Google Scholar]
52.
Daminabo SC, Goel S, Grammatikos SA, Nezhad HY, Thakur VK. Fused deposition modeling-based additive manufacturing (3D printing): techniques for polymer material systems. Mater. Today Chem. 2020, 16, 100248. [Google Scholar]
53.
Bekas DG, Hou Y, Liu Y, Panesar A. 3D printing to enable multifunctionality in polymer-based composites: A review. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 179, 107540. [Google Scholar]
54.
Liaw CY, Guvendiren M. Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in medicine. Biofabrication 2017, 9, 024102. [Google Scholar]
55.
Gaurav, Hasan N, Malik AK, Singh V, Raza K, Ahmad FJ, et al. Recent update of 3D printing technology in pharmaceutical formulation development. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2021, 32, 2306–2330. [Google Scholar]
56.
Dhaher YY, Bignardi C, Ruiz OG. Three-dimensional Printing of a Multi-material Model of the Knee Joint. Thesis. Corso di laurea magistrale in Ingegneria Biomedica. Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy, 2019.
57.
Singh N, Sridevi N, Sawhny A. 3D Printing in Dentistry; Dentomed Publication House: Amritsar, India, 2021.
58.
Hatton GB, Madla CM, Gaisford S, Basit AW. Medical applications of 3D Printing. In 3D Printing of Pharmaceuticals; Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 163–182.
59.
Awad RH, Habash SA, Hansen CJ. 3D printing methods. In 3D Printing Applications in Cardiovascular Medicine; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 11–32.
60.
Els J. Optimal process parameters for Direct Metal Laser Sintering of Ti64 for medical implant production. Doctoral Dissertation, Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein, Bloemfontein, South Africa, 2016.
61.
Kinstlinger IS, Bastian A, Paulsen SJ, Hwang DH, Ta AH, Yalacki DR, et al. Open-source selective laser sintering (OpenSLS) of nylon and biocompatible polycaprolactone. PloS ONE 2016, 11, e0147399. [Google Scholar]
62.
Singh S, Sachdeva A, Sharma VS. Investigation of dimensional accuracy/mechanical properties of part produced by selective laser sintering. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2012, 10, 59–68. [Google Scholar]
63.
Tolochko NK, Khlopkov YV, Mozzharov SE, Ignatiev MB, Laoui T, Titov VI. Absorptance of powder materials suitable for laser sintering. Rapid Prototyping J. 2000, 6, 155–161. [Google Scholar]
64.
Du Y, Liu H, Shuang J, Wang J, Ma J, Zhang S. Microsphere-based selective laser sintering for building macroporous bone scaffolds with controlled microstructure and excellent biocompatibility. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces 2015, 135, 81–89. [Google Scholar]
65.
Tan KH, Chua CK, Leong KF, Cheah CM, Gui WS, Tan WS, Wiria FE. Selective laser sintering of biocompatible polymers for applications in tissue engineering. Bio-med. Mater. Eng. 2005, 15, 113–124. [Google Scholar]
66.
Hassanajili S, Karami-Pour A, Oryan A, Talaei-Khozani T. Preparation and characterization of PLA/PCL/HA composite scaffolds using indirect 3D printing for bone tissue engineering. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2019, 104, 109960. [Google Scholar]
67.
Duan B, Wang M. Selective laser sintering and its biomedical applications. In Laser Technology in Biomimetics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 83–109.
68.
Pandey R. Photopolymers in 3D Printing Applications. PHD, Arcada University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki, Finland, 2014.
69.
Khadilkar A, Wang J, Rai R. Deep learning–based stress prediction for bottom-up SLA 3D printing process. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 102, 2555–2569. [Google Scholar]
70.
Ma Y, Che Y. A brief introduction to 3D printing technology. In Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of the GRCA, Dubai, UAE, 2015.
71.
Gibson I, Rosen W; Stucker B. Additive Manufacturing Technologies; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
72.
Pfister A, Landers R, Laib A, Hübner U, Schmelzeisen R, Mülhaupt R. Biofunctional rapid prototyping for tissue‐engineering applications: 3D bioplotting versus 3D printing. J. Polym. Sci. Part A Polym. Chem. 2004, 42, 624–638. [Google Scholar]
73.
Tzounis L, Bangeas P. 3D printing and nanotechnology. In 3D Printing: Applications in Medicine and Surgery; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2022; Volume 2; pp. 7–26. 
74.
Bishop GW, Satterwhite JE, Bhakta S, Kadimisetty K, Gillette KM, Chen E, et al. 3D-printed fluidic devices for nanoparticle preparation and flow-injection amperometry using integrated prussian blue nanoparticle-modified electrodes. Anal. Chem. 2015, 87, 5437–5443. [Google Scholar]
75.
Parry EJ, Best JM, Banks CE. Three-dimensional (3D) scanning and additive manufacturing (AM) allows the fabrication of customised crutch grips. Mater. Today Commun. 2020, 25, 101225. [Google Scholar]
76.
Tappa K, Jammalamadaka U. Novel biomaterials used in medical 3D printing techniques.  J. Funct. Biomater. 2018, 9, 17. [Google Scholar]
77.
Gupta V, Mahbub P, Nesterenko PN, Paull B. A new 3D printed radial flow-cell for chemiluminescence detection: Application in ion chromatographic determination of hydrogen peroxide in urine and coffee extracts. Anal. Chim. Acta 2018, 1005, 81–92. [Google Scholar]
78.
Sochol RD, Sweet E, Glick CC, Wu SY, Yang C, Restaino M, et al. 3D printed microfluidics and microelectronics. Microelectron. Eng. 2018, 189, 52–68. [Google Scholar]
79.
Mele M, Campana G, Monti GL. Modelling of the capillarity effect in Multi Jet Fusion technology. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 30, 100879. [Google Scholar]
80.
Morales-Planas S, Minguella-Canela J, Lluma-Fuentes J, Travieso-Rodriguez JA, García-Granada AA. Multi Jet Fusion PA12 manufacturing parameters for watertightness, strength and tolerances. Materials 2018, 11, 1472. [Google Scholar]
81.
Available online: https://facfox.com/service/mjf-3d-printing-service/ (accessed on 16 January 2024).
82.
Abbott CS, Sperry M, Crane NB. Relationships between porosity and mechanical properties of polyamide 12 parts produced using the laser sintering and multi-jet fusion powder bed fusion processes. J. Manuf. Processes 2021, 70, 55–66. [Google Scholar]
83.
Hopper DG. Creation and transition of digital light processing technology to defense applications. Proc. SPIE 2005, 5801, 113–124. [Google Scholar]
84.
Wang J, Liu Y, Fan Z, Wang W, Wang B, Guo Z. Ink-based 3D printing technologies for graphene-based materials: a review. Adv. Compos. Hybrid Mater. 2019, 2, 1–33. [Google Scholar]
85.
Hwang HH, Zhu W, Victorine G, Lawrence N, Chen S. 3D‐Printing of Functional Biomedical Microdevices via Light‐and Extrusion‐Based Approaches. Small Methods 2018, 2, 1700277. [Google Scholar]
86.
Zhang J, Hu Q, Wang S, Tao J, Gou M. Digital light processing based three-dimensional printing for medical applications. Int. J. Bioprint. 2020, 6, 242. [Google Scholar]
87.
Badiuk SR, Sasaki DK, Rickey DW. An anthropomorphic maxillofacial phantom using 3-dimensional printing, polyurethane rubber and epoxy resin for dental imaging and dosimetry. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. 2021, 50, 20200323. [Google Scholar]
88.
Available online: https://monroeengineering.com/blog/the-3-basic-steps-of-3d-printing/ (accessed on 16 January 2024).
89.
Birbara NS, Otton JM, Pather N. 3D Modelling and Printing Technology to Produce Patient-Specific 3D Models. Hear. Lung Circ. 2019, 28, 302–313. [Google Scholar]
90.
Luximon A, Luximon Y. New technologies—3D scanning, 3D design, and 3D printing. In Handbook of Footwear Design and Manufacture; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2021; pp. 477–503.
91.
Wang P, Yang J, Hu Y, Huo J, Feng X. Innovative design of a helmet based on reverse engineering and 3D printing. Alexandria Eng. J. 2021, 60, 3445–3453. [Google Scholar]
92.
Yang J, Na L, Shi J, Tang W, Zhang G, Zhang F. Multimaterial 3D Printing Technology; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021.
93.
Iancu C. About 3D Printing File Formats. Ann. Constantin Brancusi Univ. Targu Jiu-Letters Soc. Sci. Ser. 2018, 2, 135–138. [Google Scholar]
94.
Yap HK, Ng HY, Yeow CH. High-Force Soft Printable Pneumatics for Soft Robotic Applications. Soft Robot. 2016, 3, 144–158. [Google Scholar]
95.
Sydney Gladman A, Matsumoto EA, Nuzzo RG, Mahadevan L, Lewis JA. Biomimetic 4D printing. Nat. Mater. 2016, 15, 413–418. [Google Scholar]
96.
Gamzina D, Kozina M, Mehta A, Nanni EA, Tantawi S, Welander PB, et al. Copper reconsidered: Material innovations to transform vacuum electronics. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Vacuum Electronics Conference (IVEC), Busan, Korea, 29 May–1 April 2019.
97.
Yeh PC, Chen J, Karakurt I, Lin L. 3D Printed Bio-Sensing Chip for the Determination of Bacteria Antibiotic-Resistant Profile. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Solid-State Sensors, Actuators and Microsystems & Eurosensors XXXIII, Berlin, Germany, 23–27 June 2019; pp. 126–129.
98.
Ortiz-Acosta D, Moore T. Functional 3D printed polymeric materials. Funct. Mater. 2019, 9, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
99.
Ghilan A, Chiriac AP, Nita LE, Rusu AG, Neamtu I, Chiriac VM. Trends in 3D printing processes for biomedical field: Opportunities and challenges. J. Polym. Environ. 2020, 28, 1345–1367. [Google Scholar]
100.
Ebhodaghe SO. Natural Polymeric Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2021, 32, 2144–2194. [Google Scholar]
101.
Chen Q, Maalihan RD, Ren J, da Silva ÍG, Dugos NP, Caldona EB, et al. 3D printing of biomedically relevant polymer materials and biocompatibility.  Mrs Commun. 2021, 11, 197–212. [Google Scholar]
102.
Sharma D, Saha S, Satapathy BK. Recent advances in polymer scaffolds for biomedical applications. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2021, 1–67
103.
Balla VK, Kate KH, Satyavolu J, Singh P, Tadimeti JG. Additive manufacturing of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites: Processing and prospects. Compos. B. Eng. 2019, 174, 106956. [Google Scholar]
104.
Bonandrini B, Figliuzzi M, Papadimou E, Morigi M, Perico N, Casiraghi F, et al. Recellularization of well-preserved acellular kidney scaffold using embryonic stem cells. Tissue Eng. Part A 2014, 20, 1486–1498. [Google Scholar]
105.
Dal Pra I, Freddi G, Minic J, Chiarini A, Armato U. De novo engineering of reticular connective tissue in vivo by silk fibroin nonwoven materials. Biomaterials 2005, 26, 1987–1999. [Google Scholar]
106.
Unger RE, Wolf M, Peters K, Motta A, Migliaresi C, Kirkpatrick CJ. Growth of human cells on a non-woven silk fibroin net: a potential for use in tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2004, 25, 1069–1075. [Google Scholar]
107.
Maniglio D, Bonani W, Migliaresi C, Motta A. Silk fibroin porous scaffolds by N2O foaming. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2018, 29, 491–506. [Google Scholar]
108.
Ali A, Bano S, Poojary S, Chaudhary A, Kumar D, Negi YS. Effect of cellulose nanocrystals on chitosan/PVA/nano β-TCP composite scaffold for bone tissue engineering application. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2022, 33, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
109.
Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitosan (accessed on 16 January 2024).
110.
Croisier F, Jérôme C. Chitosan-based biomaterials for tissue engineering. Eur. Polym. J. 2013, 49, 780–792. [Google Scholar]
111.
Ahmed S, Ali A, Sheikh J. A review on chitosan centred scaffolds and their applications in tissue engineering. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 116, 849–862. [Google Scholar]
113.
Xu D, Chen S, Xie C, Liang Q, Xiao X. Cryogenic 3D printing of modified polylactic acid scaffolds with biomimetic nanofibrous architecture for bone tissue engineering. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2022, 33, 532–549. [Google Scholar]
114.
Santoro M, Shah SR, Walker JL, Mikos AG. Poly (lactic acid) nanofibrous scaffolds for tissue engineering. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2016, 107, 206–212. [Google Scholar]
115.
Gregor A, Filová E, Novák M, Kronek J, Chlup H, Buzgo M, et al. Designing of PLA scaffolds for bone tissue replacement fabricated by ordinary commercial 3D printer. J. Biol. Eng. 2017, 11, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
116.
Da Silva D, Kaduri M, Poley M, Adir O, Krinsky N, Shainsky-Roitman J, et al. Biocompatibility, biodegradation and excretion of polylactic acid (PLA) in medical implants and theranostic systems. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 340, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
117.
Athanasiou KA, Agrawal CM, Barber FA, Burkhart SS. Orthopaedic applications for PLA-PGA biodegradable polymers. Arthroscopy 1998, 14, 726–737. [Google Scholar]
118.
Perego G, Cella GD, Bastioli C. Effect of molecular weight and crystallinity on poly (lactic acid) mechanical properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1996, 59, 37–43. [Google Scholar]
119.
DeStefano V, Khan S, Tabada A. Applications of PLA in modern medicine. Eng. Regen. 2020, 1, 76–87. [Google Scholar]
120.
Ramot Y, Haim-Zada M, Domb AJ, Nyska A. Biocompatibility and safety of PLA and its copolymers. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2016, 107, 153–162. [Google Scholar]
121.
Casavola C, Cazzato A, Moramarco V, Renna G. Mechanical behaviour of ABS-Fused Filament Fabrication compounds under impact tensile loadings. Materials 2019, 12, 1295. [Google Scholar]
122.
Galeja M, Hejna A, Kosmela P, Kulawik A. Static and dynamic mechanical properties of 3D printed ABS as a function of raster angle. Materials 2020, 13, 297. [Google Scholar]
123.
Products for Medical Applications. Available online: www.elix-polymers.com (accessed on 16 January 2024).
124.
Ziąbka M, Dziadek M, Menaszek E, Banasiuk R, Królicka A. Middle ear prosthesis with bactericidal efficacy—In vitro investigation. Molecules 2017, 22, 1681. [Google Scholar]
125.
Thi Hiep N, Chan Khon H, Dai Hai N, Byong-Taek L, Van Toi V, Thanh Hung L. Biocompatibility of PCL/PLGA-BCP porous scaffold for bone tissue engineering applications. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2017, 28, 864–878. [Google Scholar]
126.
Dziadek M, Pawlik J, Menaszek E, Stodolak‐Zych E, Cholewa‐Kowalska K. Effect of the preparation methods on architecture, crystallinity, hydrolytic degradation, bioactivity, and biocompatibility of PCL/bioglass composite scaffolds. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2015, 103, 1580–1593. [Google Scholar]
127.
Oh GW, Nguyen VT, Heo SY, Ko SC, Kim CS, Park WS, et al. 3D PCL/fish collagen composite scaffolds incorporating osteogenic abalone protein hydrolysates for bone regeneration application: in vitro and in vivo studies. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2021, 32, 355–371. [Google Scholar]
128.
Lu L, Zhang Q, Wootton D, Chiou R, Li D, Lu B, et al. Biocompatibility and biodegradation studies of PCL/β-TCP bone tissue scaffold fabricated by structural porogen method. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2012, 23, 2217–2226. [Google Scholar]
129.
Available online: https://omnexus.specialchem.com/selection-guide/polycarbonate-pc-plastic (accessed on 16 January 2024).
130.
Available online: https://www.mddionline.com/news/medical-applications-polycarbonate (accessed on 16 January 2024).
131.
Pugliese R, Beltrami B, Regondi S, Lunetta C. Polymeric Biomaterials for 3D Printing in Medicine: An Overview.  Ann. 3D Print. Med. 2021, 2, 100011. [Google Scholar]
132.
133.
Hu G, Zhu Y, Xu F, Ye J, Guan J, Jiang Y, Yao X. Comparison of surface properties, cell behaviors, bone regeneration and osseointegration between nano tantalum/PEEK composite and nano silicon nitride/PEEK composite. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2022, 33, 35–56. [Google Scholar]
134.
Yang C, Tian X, Li D, Cao Y, Zhao F, Shi C. Influence of thermal processing conditions in 3D printing on the crystallinity and mechanical properties of PEEK material. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2017, 248, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
135.
Wang P, Zou B, Xiao H, Ding S, Huang C. Effects of printing parameters of fused deposition modeling on mechanical properties, surface quality, and microstructure of PEEK. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2019, 271, 62–74. [Google Scholar]
136.
Winnacker M. Polyamides and their functionalization: recent concepts for their applications as biomaterials. Biomater. Sci. 2017, 5, 1230–1235. [Google Scholar]
137.
Available online: https://www.makerbot.com/stories/design/nylon-3d-printing/ (accessed on 16 January 2024).
138.
Kumaresan T, Gandhinathan R, Ramu M, Ananthasubramanian M, Pradheepa KB. Design, analysis and fabrication of polyamide/hydroxyapatite porous structured scaffold using selective laser sintering method for bio-medical applications. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2016, 30, 5305–5312. [Google Scholar]
139.
Al-Dulimi Z, Wallis M, Tan DK, Maniruzzaman M, Nokhodchi A. 3D printing technology as innovative solutions for biomedical applications. Drug Discovery Today 2021, 26, 360–383. [Google Scholar]
140.
Ravichandran R, Sundarrajan S, Venugopal JR, Mukherjee S, Ramakrishna S. Advances in polymeric systems for tissue engineering and biomedical applications. Macromol. Biosci. 2012, 12, 286–311. [Google Scholar]
141.
Chisholm MS. Artificial glass—the versatility of poly (methyl methacrylate) from its early exploitation to the new millennium. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 841. [Google Scholar]
142.
Waxler RM, Horowitz D, Feldman A. Optical and physical parameters of Plexiglas 55 and Lexan. Appl. Opt. 1979, 18, 101–104. [Google Scholar]
143.
Hajdu SI, Darvishian F. A Note from History: Landmarks in History of Cancer, part 5. Cancer 2013, 119, 1450–1466. [Google Scholar]
144.
Ali MG, Mousa HM, Blaudez F, Abd El-sadek MS, Mohamed MA, Abdel-Jaber GT, et al. Dual nanofiber scaffolds composed of polyurethane-gelatin/nylon 6-gelatin for bone tissue engineering. Colloids Surfaces A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 2020, 597, 124817. [Google Scholar]
145.
Liles DT. The Fascinating World of Silicones. In Proceedings of the Plenary Lecture at the 39th Waterborne Symposium, New Orleans, LA, USA, 13–17 February 2012.
146.
Victor A, Ribeiro JE, Araújo FF. Study of PDMS characterization and its applications in biomedicine: A review. J. Mech. Eng. Biomech. 2019, 4, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
147.
Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyether_ether_ketone (accessed on 16 January 2024).
148.
Available online: https://matmatch.com/learn/material/polyether-ether-ketone-peek (accessed on 16 January 2024).
150.
Chakrabarty G, Vashishtha M, Leeder D. Polyethylene in knee arthroplasty: A review. J. Clin. Orthop. Trauma 2015, 6, 108–112. [Google Scholar]
153.
Available online: https://www.britannica.com/science/nylon (accessed on 16 January 2024).
154.
Shakiba M, Rezvani Ghomi E, Khosravi F, Jouybar S, Bigham A, Zare M, et al. Nylon—A material introduction and overview for biomedical applications. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2021, 32, 3368–3383. [Google Scholar]
155.
Ashter SA. Introduction to Bioplastics Engineering; William Andrew: Norwich, NY, USA, 2016.
156.
Lasprilla AJ, Martinez GA, Lunelli BH, Jardini AL, Maciel Filho R. Poly-lactic acid synthesis for application in biomedical devices—A review. Biotechnol. Adv. 2012, 30, 321–328. [Google Scholar]
157.
Donate R, Monzón M, Alemán-Domínguez ME. Additive manufacturing of PLA-based scaffolds intended for bone regeneration and strategies to improve their biological properties. e-Polymers 2020, 20, 571–599. [Google Scholar]
158.
Narayanan G, Vernekar VN, Kuyinu EL, Laurencin CT. Poly (lactic acid)-based biomaterials for orthopaedic regenerative engineering. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2016, 107, 247–276. [Google Scholar]
159.
DileepKumar VG, Sridhar MS, Aramwit P, Krut’ko VK, Musskaya ON, Glazov IE, et al. A review on the synthesis and properties of hydroxyapatite for biomedical applications. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2022, 33, 229–261. [Google Scholar]
Creative Commons

© 2024 by the authors; licensee SCIEPublish, SCISCAN co. Ltd. This article is an open access article distributed under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).