Event Abstract

3D-printing bioresorbable vascular stents with metal stent-matching recoil strength

  • 1 Northwestern University, Mechanical Engineering, United States
  • 2 Northwestern University, Biomedical Engineering, United States
  • 3 Northwestern University, Simpson Querrey Institute, United States
  • 4 Northwestern University, Surgery, United States

Introduction: The placement of a vascular stent is a common intervention to address the obstruction of blood flow as a result of atherosclerotic disease[1],[2]. Problems associated with metal stents led to the development of bioresorbable stents (BRS)[3]. BRSs allow resistance against late stent thrombosis[4] and restoration of natural vasomotion following stent resorption. Poly(L-lactide) (PLLA) or its copolymer with glycolic acid have been investigated for BRS[6],[6]. However, degradation is very slow, potentially affecting long-term tissue remodeling, while the polymer degradation products are oxidative stress-inducing[7]-[9], which could exacerbate tissue inflammation and intimal hyperplasia[10],[11]. Polymer properties also limit strut designs, complicating BRS manufacture. Finally, none of these stents allow for patient-specific customization, which could improve vessel patency. In this work we investigated a UV-curable, antioxidant polydiolcitrate together with projection microstereolithography (PμSL) to fabricate bioresorbable stents that can be customized for each patient. This flexible additive manufacturing could potentially be used for on-the-spot printing, e.g. in the operating room[12],[13].

Materials and Methods: Biomaterial Ink: Citric acid and 1,12-dodecanediol were melted in a 2:1 ratio, co-polymerized (140°C, 30 min), purified and freeze-dried. This pre-polymer (22g) was dissolved in tetrahydrofuran (180 mL) with imidazole (816 mg) and glycidyl methacrylate (17.04 g), heated (60°C, 6 hrs) and purified to yield methacrylated poly(1,12-dodecamethylene citrate) (mPDC). To formulate B-InkTM, 52% mPDC was mixed with 2.2% Irgacure 819 (photo-initiator), 0.2% Sudan I (UV absorber to control curing depth) and 46% diethyl fumarate (solvent to control viscosity) (Fig. 1A). Degradation: UV-cured films were incubated in PBS, collected at time points, washed with water, freezedried and weighed (Fig. 1B). Antioxidant properties: Cured films were incubated in free radical ABTS solution. The absorption peak at 734 nm can be monitored and color change is a measure of free radical scavenging (Fig. 1C). Cell compatibility: Cured mPDC was gas sterilized, incubated in DMEM media to remove unreacted monomers and seeded with human aortic smooth muscle cells (HASMC). After 3 days, viability was assessed with calcein AM (Fig.1D). Projection microstereolithography (PμSL): Stents were built from the B-InkTM in a 20 µm layer-by-layer fashion directly from a 3D CAD design (Fig. 2B). Each layer was cured by single exposure using a liquid crystal display panel as a dynamic mask for UV light. After the final layer, stents were further polymerized with additional UV exposure (Fig. 2A). Morphology: Morphology of the printed stents was observed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Fig. 2C, D). Mechanical testing: Radial compression tests of stents to 25% of the stents' outer diameter were performed on an Instron 5544 mechanical tester (Fig. 2E).

Results and Discussion: Synthesized mPDC could be cured by UV exposure (Fig. 1A). mPDC is degradable, antioxidant and cell compatible (Fig. 1B-D). Formulation into B-InkTM enabled UV-based 3D printing of stents with 20 µm layers using projection microstereolithography (Fig. 2A-D). The mechanical properties of 3D-printed stents with struts of 400 µm were comparable to those of a control nitinol stent (Fig. 2E). These results hold great promise for on-the-spot patient-customized stent manufacture.

References:
[1] Kudagi, V. S.; White, C. J. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2013, 13, 199-212. DOl:10.1007/s40256-013-0023-6
[2] Litsky, J.; Chanda, A.; Stilp, E.; Lansky, A.; Mena, C. Medical Devices (Auckland, N.Z.) 2014, 7, 149-156. DOl:10.2147/MDER.S45472
[3] Kassimis, G.; Spiliopoulos, S.; Katsanos, K.; Tsetis, D.; Krokidis, M. E. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2014, 12, 443-50. DOl:10.1586/14779072.2014.897226
[4] Bosiers, M.; Cagiannos, C.; Deloose, K.; Verbist, J.; Peeters, P. Vascular Health and Risk Management 2008, 4, 553-559.
[5] Onuma, Y.; Serruys, P. W. Circulation 2011, 123, 779-797. DOl:10.1161/circulationaha.110.971606
[6] Iqbal, J.; Onuma, Y.; Ormiston, J.; Abizaid, A.; Waksman, R.; Serruys, P. Eur Heart J 2014, 35, 765-76. DOl:10.1093/eurheartj/eht542
[7] Abbott, D. A.; Suir, E.; Duong, G. H.; de Hulster, E.; Pronk, J. T.; van Maris, A. J. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009, 75, 2320-5. DOl:10.1128/aem.00009-09
[8] Selvam, S.; Kundu, K.; Templeman, K. L.; Murthy, N.; Garcia, A. J. Biomaterials 2011, 32, 7785-92. DOl:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.07.020
[9] Zhou, J.; Tsai, Y. T.; Weng, H.; Tang, L. Free Radic Biol Med 2012, 52, 218-26. DOl:10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2011.10.452
[10] Kawamoto, R.; Yamashita, A.; Nishihira, K.; Furukoji, E.; Hatakeyama, K.; Ishikawa, T.; Imamura, T.; Itabe, H.; Eto, T.; Asada, Y. Pathol Res Pract 2006, 202, 447-56. DOl:10.1016/j.prp.2005.12.011
[11] Juni, R. P.; Duckers, H. J.; Vanhoutte, P. M.; Virmani, R.; Moens, A. L. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013, 61, 1471-81. DOl:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.11.068
[12] Mota, C.; Puppi, D.; Chiellini, F.; Chiellini, E. Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine 2015, 9, 174-190. DOl:10.1002/term.1635
[13] Bose, S.; Vahabzadeh, S.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Materials Today 2013, 16, 496-504. DOl:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2013.11.017

Keywords: blood vessel, material design, Bioprinting, Biodegradable material

Conference: 10th World Biomaterials Congress, Montréal, Canada, 17 May - 22 May, 2016.

Presentation Type: New Frontier Oral

Topic: Biomaterials in printing

Citation: Baker E, Ware H, Van Lith R, Yang J, Zhou F, Sun C and Ameer G (2016). 3D-printing bioresorbable vascular stents with metal stent-matching recoil strength. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. Conference Abstract: 10th World Biomaterials Congress. doi: 10.3389/conf.FBIOE.2016.01.02062

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 27 Mar 2016; Published Online: 30 Mar 2016.