隨著器官移植和組織再生的需求逐年增加，無細胞和細胞負載的支架治療變得更加流行。為了滿足生物可降解細胞支架的巨大需求，3D列印製造技術被選擇用於建構細胞支架因其擁有下列優點：快速原型製作、可以在常溫常壓下製造以及可製作特殊形狀的能力。聚甘油癸二酸酯丙烯酸酯（PGSA）和聚乙二醇二丙烯酸酯（PEGDA）是兩種適用於組織工程的可光固化的生醫高分子材料。在這個研究中，由PGSA-co-PEGDA製成的支架由數位光積層製造（DLP-AM）和擠出成型生物列印機製造。儘管3D光加工系統具有許多優點，但仍存在一些困難。首先，支架的尺寸收縮導致支架變形。其次，在無細胞療法中，細胞不均勻地分佈在支架中。製造載有細胞的支架可以導致更均勻的細胞分佈。
因此，本研究中有兩個重點。首先，測量PGSA-co-PEGDA支架的尺寸收縮。垂直方向(z-axis)上收縮率為20％至30％，遠高於水平面(x,y-plane)上的收縮率（2％至4％）。基於該結果，通過列印前改變列印物的尺寸設計，成功地製造了具有高製造精準度的圓管。其次，開發以PGSA為基礎的生物墨水以製造負載細胞的支架，解決細胞分佈不均勻的問題。以PGSA為基礎的生物墨水由PGSA、PEGDA、生物培養液(DMEM)和細胞組成。儘管以PGSA為基礎的生物墨水表現出剪切稀化特性，但粘度不足而無法通過擠出生物列印機成功製造負載細胞的支架。然而，以PGSA為基礎的生物墨水以DLP-AM成功印刷，細胞存活測試證明，在特定的生物墨水配方下，90%細胞可以在3D列印後存活。結合機械測試和溶脹測試的結果，以PGSA為基礎的生物墨水作為載有細胞的支架的材料顯示出巨大的潛力。

As the demand of organ transplantation and tissue regeneration increases year after year, acellular and cell-laden scaffold therapies become more popular. In order to fulfill the huge needs of biodegradable scaffolds, 3D-photofabrication techniques are used for constructing scaffolds due to their advantages such as fast prototyping, fabrication under ambient condition, and manufacturability of customized geometry. Poly(glycerol sebacate) acrylate (PGSA) and poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA) are two photocurable biopolymers suitable for tissue engineering. In this work, scaffolds made of PGSA-co-PEGDA are fabricated by digital light processing additive manufacturing (DLP-AM) and extrusion bioprinter. In spite of the many benefits of 3D-photofabrication systems, several difficulties still remain. First, dimensional shrinkage of scaffolds results in deformation of scaffolds. Second, in acellular therapy, the cells are unevenly distributed in scaffolds. Fabricating cell-laden scaffolds may lead to more even distribution of cells.
Therefore, two works are in this study. First, the dimensional shrinkage of PGSA-co-PEGDA scaffolds are measured. The z-dimensional shrinkages are 20 to 30%, which is much higher than the shrinkage on x,y plane (2 to 4%). Based on the results, circular tubes with high printing precision were successfully printed by the modification of dimension. Second, to develop PGSA-based bioinks for cell-laden scaffolds solving the uneven distribution of cells. PGSA-based bioinks consist of PGSA, PEGDA, DMEM and cells. Although PGSA-based bioinks demonstrates shear thinning property, the viscosity is not enough to be successfully printed by extrusion bioprinter. However, PGSA-based bioinks were successfully printed by DLP-AM system, and the cell viability test proved that more than one third cells can survive after harmful photofabrication. Combined with the results of mechanical test and swelling test, PGSA-based bioinks show great potential as the material for cell-laden scaffolds.

1. Division of Transplantation, R., MD; United Network for Organ Sharing, Richmond, VA; University Renal Research and Education Association, Ann Arbor, MI., 2018 Annual Report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 2003-2017.
2. Chartrain, N.A., C.B. Williams, and A.R. Whittington, A Review on Fabricating Tissue Scaffolds Using Vat Photopolymerization. Acta Biomaterialia, 2018. 74: p. 90-111.
3. Langer, R. and J. Vacanti, Tissue Engineering. Science, 1993. 260(5110): p. 920-926.
4. 3D Bioprinting for Cardiovascular Regeneration and Pharmacology. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2018.
5. Ligon, S.C., et al., Polymers for 3D Printing and Customized Additive Manufacturing. Chemical Reviews, 2017. 117(15): p. 10212-10290.
6. Sears, N.A., et al., A Review of Three-Dimensional Printing in Tissue Engineering. Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews, 2016. 22(4): p. 298-310.
7. 3D Bioprinting and the Current Applications in Tissue Engineering. Biotechnology Journal, 2017. 12(8): p. 1600734.
8. Murphy, S.V. and A. Atala, 3D Bioprinting of Tissues and Organs. Nature Biotechnology, 2014. 32: p. 773.
9. 3D Bioprinting: New Directions in Articular Cartilage Tissue Engineering. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering, 2017. 3(11): p. 2657.
10. Pereira, R.F. and P.J. Bártolo, 3D Photo-Fabrication for Tissue Engineering and Drug Delivery. Engineering, 2015. 1(1): p. 090-112.
11. Annabi, N., et al., Controlling the Porosity and Microarchitecture of Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering. Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews, 2010. 16(4): p. 371-383.
12. Bajaj, P., et al., 3D Biofabrication Strategies for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 2014. 16(1): p. 247-276.
13. Gross, B.C., et al., Evaluation of 3D Printing and Its Potential Impact on Biotechnology and the Chemical Sciences. Analytical Chemistry, 2014. 86(7): p. 3240-3253.
14. Fedorovich, N.E., et al., Three-Dimensional Fiber Deposition of Cell-Laden, Viable, Patterned Constructs for Bone Tissue Printing. Tissue Engineering Part A, 2008. 14(1): p. 127-133.
15. Abbadessa, A., et al., A Synthetic Thermosensitive Hydrogel for Cartilage Bioprinting and Its Biofunctionalization with Polysaccharides. Biomacromolecules, 2016. 17(6): p. 2137-2147.
16. Gaebel, R., et al., Patterning Human Stem Cells and Endothelial Cells with Laser Printing for Cardiac Regeneration. Biomaterials, 2011. 32(35): p. 9218-9230.
17. Owens, C.M., et al., Biofabrication and Testing of a Fully Cellular Nerve Graft. Biofabrication, 2013. 5(4): p. 045007-045007.
18. Lee, Y.-B., et al., Bio-Printing of Collagen and VEGF-Releasing Fibrin Gel Scaffolds for Neural Stem Cell Culture. Experimental Neurology, 2010. 223(2): p. 645-652.
19. Yoon No, D., et al., 3D Liver Models on a Microplatform: Well-Defined Culture, Engineering of Liver Tissue and Liver-on-a-Chip. Lab Chip, 2015. 15.
20. Lee, V., et al., Design and Fabrication of Human Skin by Three-Dimensional Bioprinting. Tissue Engineering Part C: Methods, 2013. 20(6): p. 473-484.
21. Liu, C., Z. Xia, and J.T. Czernuszka, Design and Development of Three-Dimensional Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2007. 85(7): p. 1051-1064.
22. G. Mikos, A. and J. Temenoff, Formation of Highly Porous Biodegradable Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering. Vol. 3. 2000. 23-24.
23. Zhang, P., et al., In Vivo Mineralization and Osteogenesis of Nanocomposite Scaffold of Poly(lactide-co-glycolide) and Hydroxyapatite Surface-Grafted with Poly(l-lactide). Biomaterials, 2009. 30(1): p. 58-70.
24. Mikos, A.G., et al., Preparation and Characterization of Poly(l-lactic acid) Foams. Polymer, 1994. 35(5): p. 1068-1077.
25. Ma, P.X., Scaffolds for Tissue Fabrication. Materials Today, 2004. 7(5): p. 30-40.
26. Ratheesh, G., et al., 3D Fabrication of Polymeric Scaffolds for Regenerative Therapy. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering, 2017. 3(7): p. 1175-1194.
27. Xu, C.Y., et al., Aligned Biodegradable Nanofibrous Structure: a Potential Scaffold for Blood Vessel Engineering. Biomaterials, 2004. 25(5): p. 877-886.
28. Ghasemi-Mobarakeh, L., et al., Electrospun Poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/Gelatin Nanofibrous Scaffolds for Nerve Tissue Engineering. Biomaterials, 2008. 29(34): p. 4532-4539.
29. Vaz, C.M., et al., Design of Scaffolds for Blood Vessel Tissue Engineering Using a Multi-Layering Electrospinning Technique. Acta Biomaterialia, 2005. 1(5): p. 575-582.
30. Kumbar, S.G., et al., Electrospun Poly(lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) Scaffolds for Skin Tissue Engineering. Biomaterials, 2008. 29(30): p. 4100-4107.
31. Terminology, S.T.f.A.M.n.G.P.n., Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing – General Principles – Terminology. Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing – General Principles – Terminology.
32. A Review on Fabricating Tissue Scaffolds Using Vat Photopolymerization. Acta Biomaterialia, 2018.
33. Melchels, F.P.W., et al., Additive Manufacturing of Tissues and Organs. Progress in Polymer Science, 2012. 37(8): p. 1079-1104.
34. Zein, I., et al., Fused Deposition Modeling of Novel Scaffold Architectures for Tissue Engineering Applications. Biomaterials, 2002. 23(4): p. 1169-1185.
35. Van Uden, S., et al., Custom-Tailored Tissue Engineered Polycaprolactone Scaffolds for Total Disc Replacement. Vol. 7. 2015.
36. Pereira, R.F. and P.J. Bártolo, Photocrosslinkable Materials for the Fabrication of Tissue-Engineered Constructs by Stereolithography, in Tissue Engineering: Computer Modeling, Biofabrication and Cell Behavior, P.R. Fernandes and P.J. Bartolo, Editors. 2014, Springer Netherlands: Dordrecht. p. 149-178.
37. Melchels, F.P.W., J. Feijen, and D.W. Grijpma, A Review on Stereolithography and its Applications in Biomedical Engineering. Biomaterials, 2010. 31(24): p. 6121-6130.
38. Wendel, B., et al., Additive Processing of Polymers. Macromolecular Materials and Engineering, 2008. 293(10): p. 799-809.
39. Do, A.-V., et al., 9 - 3D Printing Technologies for 3D Scaffold Engineering, in Functional 3D Tissue Engineering Scaffolds, Y. Deng and J. Kuiper, Editors. 2018, Woodhead Publishing. p. 203-234.
40. Dhariwala, B., E. Hunt, and T. Boland, Rapid Prototyping of Tissue-Engineering Constructs, Using Photopolymerizable Hydrogels and Stereolithography. Tissue Engineering, 2004. 10(9-10): p. 1316-1322.
41. Elomaa, L., et al., Three-Dimensional Fabrication of Cell-Laden Biodegradable Poly(ethylene glycol-co-depsipeptide) Hydrogels by Visible Light Stereolithographye. JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY. B, 2015. 3(42): p. 8348-8358.
42. Mondschein, R.J., et al., Polymer Structure-Property Requirements for Stereolithographic 3D Printing of Soft Tissue Engineering Scaffolds. Biomaterials, 2017. 140: p. 170-188.
43. Hornbeck, L.J. Current Status of the Digital Micromirror Device (DMD) for Projection Television Applications. in Proceedings of IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting. 1993.
44. Lepowsky, E., M. Muradoglu, and S. Tasoglu, Towards Preserving Post-Printing Cell Viability and Improving the Resolution: Past, Present, and Future of 3D Bioprinting Theory. Bioprinting, 2018. 11: p. e00034.
45. 25th Anniversary Article: Engineering Hydrogels for Biofabrication. Adv. Mater., 2013. 25: p. 5011.
46. Webb, B. and B.J. Doyle, Parameter Optimization for 3D Bioprinting of Hydrogels. Bioprinting, 2017. 8: p. 8-12.
47. Derakhshanfar, S., et al., 3D Bioprinting for Biomedical Devices and Tissue Engineering: A Review of Recent Trends and Advances. Bioactive Materials, 2018. 3(2): p. 144-156.
48. Vispute, M., et al., Shrinkage Compensation Study for Performing Machining on Additive Manufactured Parts. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2018. 5(9, Part 3): p. 18544-18551.
49. Boschetto, A. and L. Bottini, Design for Manufacturing of Surfaces to Improve Accuracy in Fused Deposition Modeling. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2016. 37: p. 103-114.
50. Sajan, N., et al., An Investigation on Circularity Error of Components Processed on Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM). Materials Today: Proceedings, 2018. 5(1, Part 1): p. 1327-1334.
51. Reyes-Rodríguez, A., R. Dorado-Vicente, and R. Mayor-Vicario, Dimensional and Form Errors of PC Parts Printed via Fused Deposition Modelling. Procedia Manufacturing, 2017. 13: p. 880-887.
52. Armillotta, A., M. Bellotti, and M. Cavallaro, Warpage of FDM Parts: Experimental Tests and Analytic Model. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2018. 50: p. 140-152.
53. Queral, V., et al., Dimensional Accuracy of Additively Manufactured Structures for Modular Coil Windings of Stellarators. Fusion Engineering and Design, 2017. 124: p. 173-178.
54. Yang, H.J., P.J. Hwang, and S.H. Lee, A Study on Shrinkage Compensation of the SLS Process by Using the Taguchi Method. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2002. 42(11): p. 1203-1212.
55. Zhang, L., et al., Horizontal Dimensional Accuracy Prediction of Selective Laser Melting. Materials & Design, 2018. 160: p. 9-20.
56. Eswaran, P., K. Sivakumar, and M. Subramaniyan, Minimizing Error on Circularity of FDM Manufactured Part. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2018. 5(2, Part 2): p. 6675-6683.
57. Mohamed, O.A., S.H. Masood, and J.L. Bhowmik, Optimization of Fused Deposition Modeling Process Parameters for Dimensional Accuracy Using I-Optimality Criterion. Measurement, 2016. 81: p. 174-196.
58. Jian, Y., et al., Effect of Monomer Structure on Real-Time UV-Curing Shrinkage Studied by a Laser Scanning Approach. Advances in Polymer Technology, 2012. 32(1).
59. Jiang, T., et al., Exploration for Decreasing the Volume Shrinkage for Photopolymerization. Progress in Organic Coatings, 2012. 75(4): p. 398-403.
60. Park, J.-W., et al., Characteristic Shrinkage Evaluation of Photocurable Materials. Polymer Testing, 2016. 56: p. 344-353.
61. Kurdikar, D.L. and N.A. Peppas, The Volume Shrinkage, Thermal and Sorption Behaviour of Polydiacrylates. Polymer, 1995. 36(11): p. 2249-2255.
62. Venhoven, B.A.M., A. De Gee, and C.L. Davidson, Polymerization Contraction and Conversion of Light-curing BisGMA-based Methacrylate Resins. Vol. 14. 1993. 871-5.
63. Stansbury, J.W., et al., Conversion-Dependent Shrinkage Stress and Strain in Dental Resins and Composites. Dental Materials, 2005. 21(1): p. 56-67.
64. Chan, B.K., et al., Robust and Semi-Interpenetrating Hydrogels from Poly(ethylene glycol) and Collagen for Elastomeric Tissue Scaffolds. Macromolecular Bioscience, 2012. 12(11): p. 1490-1501.
65. Nair, K., et al., Characterization of Cell Viability during Bioprinting Processes. Biotechnology Journal, 2009. 4(8): p. 1168-1177.
66. Murphy, S.V., A. Skardal, and A. Atala, Evaluation of Hydrogels for Bio-Printing Applications. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2012. 101A(1): p. 272-284.
67. Groll, J., et al., A Definition of Bioinks and their Distinction from Biomaterial Inks. Biofabrication, 2018. 11(1): p. 013001.
68. Ozbolat, I.T., Scaffold-Based or Scaffold-Free Bioprinting: Competing or Complementing Approaches? Journal of Nanotechnology in Engineering and Medicine, 2015. 6(2): p. 024701-024701-6.
69. Hospodiuk, M., et al., The Bioink: A Comprehensive Review on Bioprintable Materials. Biotechnology Advances, 2017. 35(2): p. 217-239.
70. Xu, T., et al., Inkjet Printing of Viable Mammalian Cells. Biomaterials, 2005. 26(1): p. 93-99.
71. Ozbolat, I.T. and M. Hospodiuk, Current Advances and Future Perspectives in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting. Biomaterials, 2016. 76: p. 321-343.
72. Geng, L., Direct Writing of Chitosan Scaffolds Using a Robotic System. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 2005. 11(2): p. 90-97.
73. Billiet, T., et al., The 3D Printing of Gelatin Methacrylamide Cell-Laden Tissue-Engineered Constructs with High Cell Viability. Biomaterials, 2014. 35(1): p. 49-62.
74. Ferreira, A.M., et al., Collagen for Bone Tissue Regeneration. Acta Biomaterialia, 2012. 8(9): p. 3191-3200.
75. Luo, Y., K.R. Kirker, and G.D. Prestwich, Cross-Linked Hyaluronic Acid Hydrogel Films: New Biomaterials for Drug Delivery. Journal of Controlled Release, 2000. 69(1): p. 169-184.
76. Burdick, J.A. and G.D. Prestwich, Hyaluronic Acid Hydrogels for Biomedical Applications. Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.), 2011. 23(12): p. H41-H56.
77. Carrow, J.K., et al., Chapter 13 - Polymers for Bioprinting, in Essentials of 3D Biofabrication and Translation, A. Atala and J.J. Yoo, Editors. 2015, Academic Press: Boston. p. 229-248.
78. Knowlton, S., et al., Photocrosslinking-Based Bioprinting: Examining Crosslinking Schemes. Bioprinting, 2017. 5: p. 10-18.
79. Parak, A., et al., Functionalizing Bioinks for 3D Bioprinting Applications. Drug Discovery Today, 2019. 24(1): p. 198-205.
80. Paxton, N., et al., Proposal to Assess Printability of Bioinks for Extrusion-Based Bioprinting and Evaluation of Rheological Properties Governing Bioprintability. Biofabrication, 2017. 9(4): p. 044107.
81. Kiyotake, E.A., et al., Development and Quantitative Characterization of the Precursor Rheology of Hyaluronic Acid Hydrogels for Bioprinting. Acta Biomaterialia, 2019.
82. Skardal, A., Chapter 1 - Bioprinting Essentials of Cell and Protein Viability, in Essentials of 3D Biofabrication and Translation, A. Atala and J.J. Yoo, Editors. 2015, Academic Press: Boston. p. 1-17.
83. Ferris, C.J., et al., Bio-Ink for On-Demand Printing of Living Cells. Biomaterials Science, 2013. 1(2): p. 224-230.
84. Guvendiren, M., H.D. Lu, and J.A. Burdick, Shear-Thinning Hydrogels for Biomedical Applications. Soft Matter, 2012. 8(2): p. 260-272.
85. Kolesky, D.B., et al., 3D Bioprinting of Vascularized, Heterogeneous Cell-Laden Tissue Constructs. Advanced Materials, 2014. 26(19): p. 3124-3130.
86. Puppi, D., et al., Polymeric Materials for Bone and Cartilage Repair. Progress in Polymer Science, 2010. 35(4): p. 403-440.
87. Nair, L.S. and C.T. Laurencin, Biodegradable Polymers as Biomaterials. Progress in Polymer Science, 2007. 32(8): p. 762-798.
88. Annabi, N., et al., 25th Anniversary Article: Rational Design and Applications of Hydrogels in Regenerative Medicine. Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.), 2014. 26(1): p. 85-124.
89. Odian, G., Principles of Polymerization. 2004: John Wiley & Sons.
90. Wang, Y., et al., A Tough Biodegradable Elastomer. Nature Biotechnology, 2002. 20: p. 602.
91. Rai, R., et al., Synthesis, Properties and Biomedical Applications of Poly(Glycerol Sebacate) (PGS): A Review. Progress in Polymer Science, 2012. 37(8): p. 1051-1078.
92. Chen, Q.-Z., et al., Characterisation of a Soft Elastomer Poly(Glycerol Sebacate) Designed to Match the Mechanical Properties of Myocardial Tissue. Biomaterials, 2008. 29(1): p. 47-57.
93. Redenti, S., et al., Engineering Retinal Progenitor Cell and Scrollable Poly(glycerol-sebacate) Composites for Expansion and Subretinal Transplantation. Biomaterials, 2009. 30(20): p. 3405-3414.
94. Kemppainen, J.M. and S.J. Hollister, Tailoring the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Designed Poly(glycerol sebacate) Scaffolds for Cartilage Applications. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2010. 94A(1): p. 9-18.
95. Wang, Y., Y.M. Kim, and R. Langer, In Vivo Degradation Characteristics of Poly(glycerol sebacate). Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2003. 66A(1): p. 192-197.
96. Nijst, C.L.E., et al., Synthesis and Characterization of Photocurable Elastomers from Poly(glycerol-co-sebacate). Biomacromolecules, 2007. 8(10): p. 3067-3073.
97. Amsden, B.G., et al., In Vivo Degradation Behavior of Photo-Cross-Linked star-Poly(ε-caprolactone-co-d,l-lactide) Elastomers. Biomacromolecules, 2006. 7(1): p. 365-372.
98. Anseth, K.S. and J.A. Burdick, New Directions in Photopolymerizable Biomaterials. MRS Bulletin, 2011. 27(2): p. 130-136.
99. Abuchowski, A., et al., Alteration of Immunological Properties of Bovine Serum Albumin by Covalent Attachment of Polyethylene Glycol. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 1977. 252(11): p. 3578-81.
100. Knop, K., et al., Poly(ethylene glycol) in Drug Delivery: Pros and Cons as Well as Potential Alternatives. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 2010. 49(36): p. 6288-6308.
101. Harris, J.M., Poly(Ethylene Glycol) Chemistry Biotechnical and Biomedical Applications. 1992: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
102. Bencherif, S.A., et al., End-Group Effects on the Properties of PEG-co-PGA Hydrogels. Acta Biomaterialia, 2009. 5(6): p. 1872-1883.
103. Anseth, K.S., et al., Reaction Kinetics and Volume Relaxation during Polymerizations of Multiethylene Glycol Dimethacrylates. Macromolecules, 1995. 28(7): p. 2491-2499.
104. Revzin, A., et al., Fabrication of Poly(ethylene glycol) Hydrogel Microstructures Using Photolithography. Langmuir, 2001. 17(18): p. 5440-5447.
105. Sawhney, A.S., C.P. Pathak, and J.A. Hubbell, Bioerodible Hydrogels Based on Photopolymerized Poly(ethylene glycol)-co-poly(.alpha.-hydroxy acid) Diacrylate Macromers. Macromolecules, 1993. 26(4): p. 581-587.
106. Nguyen, K.T. and J.L. West, Photopolymerizable Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering Applications. Biomaterials, 2002. 23(22): p. 4307-4314.
107. Han, L.-H., et al., Projection Microfabrication of Three-Dimensional Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 2008. 130(2): p. 021005-021005-4.
108. Xia, C. and N.X. Fang, 3D Microfabricated Bioreactor with Capillaries. Biomedical Microdevices, 2009. 11(6): p. 1309-1315.
109. Chen, J.-Y.W., Jane, The Investigation of Physical and Degradation Properties of Biodegradable, Photocurable Copolymers, PGSA, PEGDA and PCLDA. 2018: National Tsing Hua University.
110. Hollenstein, M., et al., Mechanical Characterization of the Liver Capsule and Parenchyma. Vol. 4072. 2006. 150-158.
111. Pomfret, E.A., et al., Liver Regeneration and Surgical Outcome in Donors of Right-Lobe Liver Grafts. Transplantation, 2003. 76(1).
112. Heller, C., et al., Vinyl esters: Low Cytotoxicity Monomers for the Fabrication of Biocompatible 3D Scaffolds by Lithography Based Additive Manufacturing. Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry, 2009. 47(24): p. 6941-6954.
113. Soucek, M.D. and X. Ren, UV-Curable Coating Technologies, in RSC Smart Materials. 2015. p. 15-48.
114. Rouillard, A.D., et al., Methods for Photocrosslinking Alginate Hydrogel Scaffolds with High Cell Viability. Tissue Engineering Part C: Methods, 2010. 17(2): p. 173-179.
115. Skardal, A., et al., Photocrosslinkable Hyaluronan-Gelatin Hydrogels for Two-Step Bioprinting. Tissue Engineering Part A, 2010. 16(8): p. 2675-2685.
116. Bencherif, S.A., et al., Influence of the Degree of Methacrylation on Hyaluronic Acid Hydrogels Properties. Biomaterials, 2008. 29(12): p. 1739-1749.
117. Stiffness and Adhesivity Control Aortic Valve Interstitial Cell Behavior within Hyaluronic Acid Based Hydrogels. Acta Biomaterialia, 2013.
118. Cui, X., et al., Direct Human Cartilage Repair Using Three-Dimensional Bioprinting Technology. Tissue Engineering Part A, 2012. 18(11-12): p. 1304-1312.
119. Elomaa, L., et al., Preparation of Poly(ε-caprolactone)-Based Tissue Engineering Scaffolds by Stereolithography. Acta Biomaterialia, 2011. 7(11): p. 3850-3856.
120. Williams, C.G., et al., Variable Cytocompatibility of Six Cell Lines with Photoinitiators Used for Polymerizing Hydrogels and Cell Encapsulation. Biomaterials, 2005. 26(11): p. 1211-1218.
121. Shih, H. and C.-C. Lin, Visible-Light-Mediated Thiol-Ene Hydrogelation Using Eosin-Y as the Only Photoinitiator. Macromolecular Rapid Communications, 2013. 34(3): p. 269-273.
122. Fairbanks, B.D., et al., Photoinitiated Polymerization of PEG-Diacrylate with Lithium Phenyl-2,4,6-Trimethylbenzoylphosphinate: Polymerization Rate and Cytocompatibility. Biomaterials, 2009. 30(35): p. 6702-6707.
123. Lee, I.-B., et al., The Effect of Consistency, Specimen Geometry and Adhesion on the Axial Polymerization Shrinkage Measurement of Light Cured Composites. Dental Materials, 2006. 22(11): p. 1071-1079.
124. Ao-Ieong Wai-Sam , W., Jane, Synthesis and Characterization of Photocrosslinkable Biodegradable Elastomer PGSA, in Chemical Engineering. 2015: National Tsing Hua University.
125. Rao, B.S. and A. Palanisamy, Photocuring and Thermomechanical Properties of Multifunctional Amide Acrylate Compositions Derived from Castor Oil. Progress in Organic Coatings, 2010. 67(1): p. 6-11.
126. Hong, B.T., K.S. Shin, and D.S. Kim, Ultraviolet-Curing Behavior of an Epoxy Acrylate Resin System. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2005. 98(3): p. 1180-1185.
127. Fardim, P., Paper and Surface Chemistry - Part 2- Coating and Printability. Vol. 2002. 2002. 34-45.