用于骨骼肌再生的三维生物打印技术的最新发展趋势。

IF 9.4 1区 医学 Q1 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Acta Biomaterialia Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.actbio.2024.04.038
Shabnam Sabetkish , Peter Currie , Laurence Meagher
{"title":"用于骨骼肌再生的三维生物打印技术的最新发展趋势。","authors":"Shabnam Sabetkish ,&nbsp;Peter Currie ,&nbsp;Laurence Meagher","doi":"10.1016/j.actbio.2024.04.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Skeletal muscle is a pro-regenerative tissue, that utilizes a tissue-resident stem cell system to effect repair upon injury. Despite the demonstrated efficiency of this system in restoring muscle mass after many acute injuries, in conditions of severe trauma such as those evident in volumetric muscle loss (VML) (&gt;20 % by mass), this self-repair capability is unable to restore tissue architecture, requiring interventions which currently are largely surgical. As a possible alternative, the generation of artificial muscle using tissue engineering approaches may also be of importance in the treatment of VML and muscle diseases such as dystrophies. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has been identified as a promising technique for regeneration of the complex architecture of skeletal muscle. This review discusses existing treatment strategies following muscle damage, recent progress in bioprinting techniques, the bioinks used for muscle regeneration, the immunogenicity of scaffold materials, and <em>in vitro</em> and <em>in vivo</em> maturation techniques for 3D bio-printed muscle constructs. The pros and cons of these bioink formulations are also highlighted. Finally, we present the current limitations and challenges in the field and critical factors to consider for bioprinting approaches to become more translationa and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle.</p></div><div><h3>Statement of significance</h3><p>This review discusses the physiopathology of muscle injuries and existing clinical treatment strategies for muscle damage, the types of bioprinting techniques that have been applied to bioprinting of muscle, and the bioinks commonly used for muscle regeneration. The pros and cons of these bioinks are highlighted. We present a discussion of existing gaps in the literature and critical factors to consider for the translation of bioprinting approaches and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle. Finally, we provide insights into what we believe will be the next steps required before the realization of the application of tissue-engineered muscle in humans. We believe this manuscript is an insightful, timely, and instructive review that will guide future muscle bioprinting research from a fundamental construct creation approach, down a translational pathway to achieve the desired impact in the clinic.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":237,"journal":{"name":"Acta Biomaterialia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1742706124002216/pdfft?md5=8d66b6a555aee72783144cf4115f3cb0&pid=1-s2.0-S1742706124002216-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recent trends in 3D bioprinting technology for skeletal muscle regeneration\",\"authors\":\"Shabnam Sabetkish ,&nbsp;Peter Currie ,&nbsp;Laurence Meagher\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.actbio.2024.04.038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Skeletal muscle is a pro-regenerative tissue, that utilizes a tissue-resident stem cell system to effect repair upon injury. Despite the demonstrated efficiency of this system in restoring muscle mass after many acute injuries, in conditions of severe trauma such as those evident in volumetric muscle loss (VML) (&gt;20 % by mass), this self-repair capability is unable to restore tissue architecture, requiring interventions which currently are largely surgical. As a possible alternative, the generation of artificial muscle using tissue engineering approaches may also be of importance in the treatment of VML and muscle diseases such as dystrophies. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has been identified as a promising technique for regeneration of the complex architecture of skeletal muscle. This review discusses existing treatment strategies following muscle damage, recent progress in bioprinting techniques, the bioinks used for muscle regeneration, the immunogenicity of scaffold materials, and <em>in vitro</em> and <em>in vivo</em> maturation techniques for 3D bio-printed muscle constructs. The pros and cons of these bioink formulations are also highlighted. Finally, we present the current limitations and challenges in the field and critical factors to consider for bioprinting approaches to become more translationa and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle.</p></div><div><h3>Statement of significance</h3><p>This review discusses the physiopathology of muscle injuries and existing clinical treatment strategies for muscle damage, the types of bioprinting techniques that have been applied to bioprinting of muscle, and the bioinks commonly used for muscle regeneration. The pros and cons of these bioinks are highlighted. We present a discussion of existing gaps in the literature and critical factors to consider for the translation of bioprinting approaches and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle. Finally, we provide insights into what we believe will be the next steps required before the realization of the application of tissue-engineered muscle in humans. We believe this manuscript is an insightful, timely, and instructive review that will guide future muscle bioprinting research from a fundamental construct creation approach, down a translational pathway to achieve the desired impact in the clinic.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Biomaterialia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1742706124002216/pdfft?md5=8d66b6a555aee72783144cf4115f3cb0&pid=1-s2.0-S1742706124002216-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Biomaterialia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1742706124002216\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Biomaterialia","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1742706124002216","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

骨骼肌是一种促进再生的组织,在受伤后利用组织驻留干细胞系统进行修复。尽管该系统在许多急性损伤后能有效恢复肌肉质量,但在严重创伤的情况下,如肌肉体积损失(VML)(质量>20%),这种自我修复能力无法恢复组织结构,需要目前主要通过外科手术进行干预。作为一种可能的替代方法,利用组织工程方法生成人造肌肉对治疗肌肉萎缩症和肌肉萎缩症等肌肉疾病也很重要。三维(3D)生物打印已被认为是骨骼肌复杂结构再生的一种有前途的技术。本综述讨论了肌肉损伤后的现有治疗策略、生物打印技术的最新进展、用于肌肉再生的生物墨水、支架材料的免疫原性以及三维生物打印肌肉构建体的体外和体内成熟技术。我们还强调了这些生物墨水配方的优缺点。最后,我们介绍了该领域目前存在的局限性和挑战,以及生物打印方法在转化和生产临床相关工程肌肉方面需要考虑的关键因素。意义说明:这篇综述讨论了肌肉损伤的生理病理和现有的肌肉损伤临床治疗策略、已应用于肌肉生物打印的生物打印技术类型以及常用于肌肉再生的生物墨水。我们着重介绍了这些生物墨水的优缺点。我们还讨论了文献中的现有空白,以及转化生物打印方法和生产临床相关工程肌肉需要考虑的关键因素。最后,我们对实现组织工程肌肉在人体应用前所需的下一步工作提出了见解。我们相信这篇手稿是一篇具有洞察力、及时性和指导性的综述,它将指导未来的肌肉生物打印研究从基本的构造创建方法开始,沿着转化途径实现预期的临床效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Recent trends in 3D bioprinting technology for skeletal muscle regeneration

Skeletal muscle is a pro-regenerative tissue, that utilizes a tissue-resident stem cell system to effect repair upon injury. Despite the demonstrated efficiency of this system in restoring muscle mass after many acute injuries, in conditions of severe trauma such as those evident in volumetric muscle loss (VML) (>20 % by mass), this self-repair capability is unable to restore tissue architecture, requiring interventions which currently are largely surgical. As a possible alternative, the generation of artificial muscle using tissue engineering approaches may also be of importance in the treatment of VML and muscle diseases such as dystrophies. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has been identified as a promising technique for regeneration of the complex architecture of skeletal muscle. This review discusses existing treatment strategies following muscle damage, recent progress in bioprinting techniques, the bioinks used for muscle regeneration, the immunogenicity of scaffold materials, and in vitro and in vivo maturation techniques for 3D bio-printed muscle constructs. The pros and cons of these bioink formulations are also highlighted. Finally, we present the current limitations and challenges in the field and critical factors to consider for bioprinting approaches to become more translationa and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle.

Statement of significance

This review discusses the physiopathology of muscle injuries and existing clinical treatment strategies for muscle damage, the types of bioprinting techniques that have been applied to bioprinting of muscle, and the bioinks commonly used for muscle regeneration. The pros and cons of these bioinks are highlighted. We present a discussion of existing gaps in the literature and critical factors to consider for the translation of bioprinting approaches and to produce clinically relevant engineered muscle. Finally, we provide insights into what we believe will be the next steps required before the realization of the application of tissue-engineered muscle in humans. We believe this manuscript is an insightful, timely, and instructive review that will guide future muscle bioprinting research from a fundamental construct creation approach, down a translational pathway to achieve the desired impact in the clinic.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Biomaterialia
Acta Biomaterialia 工程技术-材料科学:生物材料
CiteScore
16.80
自引率
3.10%
发文量
776
审稿时长
30 days
期刊介绍: Acta Biomaterialia is a monthly peer-reviewed scientific journal published by Elsevier. The journal was established in January 2005. The editor-in-chief is W.R. Wagner (University of Pittsburgh). The journal covers research in biomaterials science, including the interrelationship of biomaterial structure and function from macroscale to nanoscale. Topical coverage includes biomedical and biocompatible materials.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Corrigendum to “Platelets and Hemostatic Proteins are Co-Localized with Chronic Neuroinflammation Surrounding Implanted Intracortical Microelectrodes” [Acta Biomaterialia. Volume 166, August 2023, Pages 278-290] Editorial Board Immunometabolic reprogramming of macrophages with inhalable CRISPR/Cas9 nanotherapeutics for acute lung injury intervention A strong, silk protein-inspired tissue adhesive with an enhanced drug release mechanism for transdermal drug delivery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1