Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia; ARC Training Centre for Cell and Tissue Engineering Technologies, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia.
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia; ARC Training Centre for Cell and Tissue Engineering Technologies, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia.
Acta Biomater. 2024 Jun;181:46-66. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2024.04.038. Epub 2024 Apr 30.
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.
骨骼肌是一种促进再生的组织,它利用组织驻留的干细胞系统来实现损伤后的修复。尽管该系统在许多急性损伤后恢复肌肉质量方面表现出了很高的效率,但在严重创伤的情况下,如体积性肌肉损失(VML)(>20%的质量损失),这种自我修复能力无法恢复组织结构,需要干预措施,目前这些干预措施主要是手术。作为一种替代方法,使用组织工程方法生成人工肌肉对于治疗 VML 和肌肉疾病(如肌营养不良症)也可能很重要。三维(3D)生物打印已被确定为骨骼肌复杂结构再生的一种有前途的技术。本文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 3D 生物打印肌肉构建体的体外和体内成熟技术。还强调了这些生物墨水配方的优缺点。最后,我们提出了该领域目前的局限性和挑战,以及生物打印方法实现更多转化并产生临床相关工程肌肉的关键因素。
本文讨论了肌肉损伤的病理生理学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。强调了这些生物墨水的优缺点。我们讨论了文献中现有的差距和关键因素,这些因素需要考虑将生物打印方法转化为产生临床相关的工程肌肉。最后,我们提供了一些见解,认为在实现组织工程肌肉在人类中的应用之前,还需要进行哪些下一步工作。我们相信,这篇论文是一篇有见地、及时且富有启发性的综述,将从基本构建体创建方法的角度指导未来的肌肉生物打印研究,沿着转化途径实现临床中的预期效果。