Primary material . | Advantage/disadvantage . | Relative 3D scaffold . |
---|---|---|
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) | 1. Covalently cross-linkable with ECM proteins. 2. Tunable mechanical stiffness. 3. Highly modular building blocks. 4. Highly transparent and scalable structure. 5. Highly consistent monomer size and structure. | 1. PEG hydrogel scaffold 2. Hybrid hydrogel |
Natural material | 1. Closest to microenvironment. 2. Holistic biochemical signals. 3. Inconsistent monomer size and structure. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. Decellularized liver scaffold 2. Matrigel |
Chitosan | 1. Biocompatible. 2. Biodegradable. 3. Highly modular. 4. Easy to process from natural materials. 5. Resembles glycosaminoglycans. | 1. Chitosan-gelatin porous structures 2. Chitosan nanofiber |
Alginate | 1. Biocompatibility. 2. Low immunogenicity. 3. High clinical precedent. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. GL–Alg–Ca hydrogel 2. Chitosan alginate scaffold |
Primary material . | Advantage/disadvantage . | Relative 3D scaffold . |
---|---|---|
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) | 1. Covalently cross-linkable with ECM proteins. 2. Tunable mechanical stiffness. 3. Highly modular building blocks. 4. Highly transparent and scalable structure. 5. Highly consistent monomer size and structure. | 1. PEG hydrogel scaffold 2. Hybrid hydrogel |
Natural material | 1. Closest to microenvironment. 2. Holistic biochemical signals. 3. Inconsistent monomer size and structure. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. Decellularized liver scaffold 2. Matrigel |
Chitosan | 1. Biocompatible. 2. Biodegradable. 3. Highly modular. 4. Easy to process from natural materials. 5. Resembles glycosaminoglycans. | 1. Chitosan-gelatin porous structures 2. Chitosan nanofiber |
Alginate | 1. Biocompatibility. 2. Low immunogenicity. 3. High clinical precedent. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. GL–Alg–Ca hydrogel 2. Chitosan alginate scaffold |
Primary material . | Advantage/disadvantage . | Relative 3D scaffold . |
---|---|---|
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) | 1. Covalently cross-linkable with ECM proteins. 2. Tunable mechanical stiffness. 3. Highly modular building blocks. 4. Highly transparent and scalable structure. 5. Highly consistent monomer size and structure. | 1. PEG hydrogel scaffold 2. Hybrid hydrogel |
Natural material | 1. Closest to microenvironment. 2. Holistic biochemical signals. 3. Inconsistent monomer size and structure. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. Decellularized liver scaffold 2. Matrigel |
Chitosan | 1. Biocompatible. 2. Biodegradable. 3. Highly modular. 4. Easy to process from natural materials. 5. Resembles glycosaminoglycans. | 1. Chitosan-gelatin porous structures 2. Chitosan nanofiber |
Alginate | 1. Biocompatibility. 2. Low immunogenicity. 3. High clinical precedent. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. GL–Alg–Ca hydrogel 2. Chitosan alginate scaffold |
Primary material . | Advantage/disadvantage . | Relative 3D scaffold . |
---|---|---|
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) | 1. Covalently cross-linkable with ECM proteins. 2. Tunable mechanical stiffness. 3. Highly modular building blocks. 4. Highly transparent and scalable structure. 5. Highly consistent monomer size and structure. | 1. PEG hydrogel scaffold 2. Hybrid hydrogel |
Natural material | 1. Closest to microenvironment. 2. Holistic biochemical signals. 3. Inconsistent monomer size and structure. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. Decellularized liver scaffold 2. Matrigel |
Chitosan | 1. Biocompatible. 2. Biodegradable. 3. Highly modular. 4. Easy to process from natural materials. 5. Resembles glycosaminoglycans. | 1. Chitosan-gelatin porous structures 2. Chitosan nanofiber |
Alginate | 1. Biocompatibility. 2. Low immunogenicity. 3. High clinical precedent. 4. High batch-to-batch variation. | 1. GL–Alg–Ca hydrogel 2. Chitosan alginate scaffold |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.