Functional Bioink and 3D Bioprinting Tissue Scaffold Applications for Spinal Cord Injury

Göster/ Aç
Erişim
info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessTarih
2025Yazar
Yücer, ŞeydanurSaraç, Begüm
Özarslan, Ali Can
Sakarya, Deniz
Özerol, Esma Ahlatçıoğlu
Çiftçi, Fatih
Üst veri
Tüm öğe kaydını gösterKünye
YÜCER, Şeydanur, Begüm SARAÇ, Ali Can ÖZARSLAN, Deniz SAKARYA, Esma Ahlatçıoğlu, ÖZEROL & Fatih ÇİFTÇİ. "Functional Bioink and 3D Bioprinting Tissue Scaffold Applications for Spinal Cord Injury". Annals of Biomedical Engineering, (2025): 1-28.Özet
Spinal cord injury (SCI), commonly resulting from sudden trauma such as traffic or sports accidents, leads to severe disruption
of axonal connections and loss of sensory and motor function below the injury site. Despite numerous therapeutic
efforts, effective strategies for neural repair remain limited. Tissue engineering has emerged as a promising approach for
axonal regeneration, particularly through the design of three-dimensional (3D) polymeric scaffolds that can restore the
structural and functional integrity of the injured spinal cord. This review focuses on recent advances in biomaterials and
scaffold designs developed for SCI repair, emphasizing the role of nanocomposite systems that combine graphene oxide
(GO), synthetic polymers such as PLGA–PEG, and bioactive ceramics like hydroxyapatite (HA). These hybrid materials
offer improved biocompatibility, mechanical matching with spinal tissue, and enhanced cellular adhesion and guidance
cues for axonal growth. The synergistic integration of these components enables the fabrication of multifunctional scaffolds
capable of supporting stem cell differentiation and neurotrophic factor delivery. By critically summarizing the key parameters
influencing scaffold performance, such as microarchitecture, surface modification, and mechanical compliance, this
work outlines a framework for developing next-generation 3D nanocomposite scaffolds for SCI regeneration. The proposed
approach highlights how GO/PLGA–PEG/HA systems can bridge the gap between experimental tissue engineering and
clinically translatable neuroregenerative therapies.


















