Biocompatibility, Cytotoxicity, and Antibacterial Evaluation of Novel Chitosan-Based 3D Bioprinted Bone Scaffolds: In Vitro Study

Arumugam, Parkavi; Sarathi, Dhivya; Gurumoorthy, Kaarthikeyan; Boyapati, Ramanarayana

doi:10.15517/n6y6a095

Authors

Parkavi Arumugam Associate Professor, Department of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5771-8994
Dhivya Sarathi Graduate student, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. Author https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2495-3443
Kaarthikeyan Gurumoorthy Professor, Department of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5521-7157
Ramanarayana Boyapati Professor, Department of Periodontology, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences, Guntur, India. Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9196-0183

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15517/n6y6a095

Keywords:

Three-dimensional bioprinting; Tissue engineering; Bone regeneration; Collagen; Chitosan; Hydroxyapatite; Health.

Abstract

The objective of the study was the biologic characterisation of novel three dimensional (3D) bioprinted osseous scaffolds developed for bone tissue engineering, using biocompatibility, cytotoxicity analysis and antibacterial assay. A composite bioink comprising polyethylene glycol (PEG), polyethylene glycol diacrylate (PEGDA), hydroxyapatite (HAP), collagen (COL), and chitosan (CH)was formulated and 3D bioprinted into osseous scaffolds using Cellink Bio X, extrusion-based 3D bioprinter. In vitro biologic characterisation included 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay for biocompatibility using MG-63 osteoblast-like cells, cytotoxicity analysis using zebrafish model, with Group A (3D bioprinted scaffolds) and Group B (Phosphate buffer saline). Antibacterial assay was performed using disc diffusion method, with Group A1(low concentration of 3D bioprinted scaffolds), Group A2 (high concentration of 3D bioprinted scaffolds), Group B (dimethyl sulfoxide), and Group C (20 mg Erythromycin and 20 mg Penicillin) against Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus, MTCC 740), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans, MTCC 890), Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis, MTCC 439), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae, MTCC 109). Biologic characterisation revealed good biocompatibility of Group A (3D bioprinted scaffolds) comparable to Group B (untreated MG63), at all time points. No significant difference in embryo viability was observed for both Groups A and B, with good length, prominent trunk, tail, and organ development. Antibacterial assay revealed significant intergroup activity across all tested strains (p = 0.000), with comparable zone of inhibition of Group A2 with the control against S. aureus and S. mutans. The biologic characterization of the novel 3D bioprinted osseous scaffolds revealed good biocompatibility, limited cytotoxicity, and promising antibacterial properties. These findings underscore the potential of the developed constructs for application in bone tissue engineering for enhancing overall health. Future studies should focus on osteogenic differentiation, mineralization, and in vivo performance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bishop E.S., Mostafa S., Pakvasa M., Luu H.H., Lee M.J., Wolf J.M., et al. 3-D bioprinting technologies in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: Current and future trends. Genes Dis. 2017; 4 (4): 185-195.

Arumugam P., Kaarthikeyan G., Eswaramoorthy R. Three-Dimensional Bioprinting: The Ultimate Pinnacle of Tissue Engineering. Cureus. 2024; 16 (4): e58029.

Ramesh S., Harrysson O., Rao P., Tamayol A., Cormier D., Zhang Y., et al. Extrusion bioprinting: Recent progress, challenges, and future opportunities. Bioprinting. 2021; 21: e00116.

Chen X.B., Anvari-Yazdi F., Duan X., Zimmerling A., Gharraei R., Sharma N.K., et al. Biomaterials / bioinks and extrusion bioprinting. Bioact Mater. 2023; 28: 511-536.

Gungor-Ozkerim P.S., Inci I., Zhang Y.S., Khademhosseini A., Dokmeci M.R. Bioinks for 3D bioprinting: an overview. Biomater Sci. 2018; 6 (5): 915-946.

Krishna D.V., Sankar M.R. Persuasive factors on the bioink printability and cell viability in the extrusion-based 3D bioprinting for tissue regeneration applications. Engineered Regeneration. 2023; 4: 396-410.

Reddy M.S.B., Ponnamma D., Choudhary R., Sadasivuni K.K. A Comparative Review of Natural and Synthetic Biopolymer Composite Scaffolds. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13 (7): 1105.

Zhang J., Wehrle E., Rubert M., Müller R. 3D Bioprinting of Human Tissues: Biofabrication, Bioinks, and Bioreactors. Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22 (8): 3971.

Salehi S., Ghomi H., Hassanzadeh-Tabrizi S.A., Koupaei N., Khodaei M. The effect of polyethylene glycol on printability, physical and mechanical properties and osteogenic potential of 3D-printed poly (l-lactic acid)/polyethylene glycol scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022; 221: 1325-1334.

Yousefiasl S., Sharifi E., Salahinejad E., Makvandi P., Irani S. Bioactive 3D-printed chitosan-based scaffolds for personalized craniofacial bone tissue engineering. Engineered Regeneration. 2023; 4: 1-11.

Guo C., Wu J., Zeng Y., Li H. Construction of 3D bioprinting of HAP/collagen scaffold in gelation bath for bone tissue engineering. Regen Biomater. 2023; 10: rbad067.

Kontakis M.G., Moulin M., Andersson B., Norein N., Samanta A., Stelzl C., et al. Trabecular-bone mimicking osteoconductive collagen scaffolds: an optimized 3D printing approach using freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels. 3D Print Med. 2025; 11 (1): 11.

Salehi S., Ghomi H., Hassanzadeh-Tabrizi S.A., Koupaei N., Khodaei M. Antibacterial and osteogenic properties of chitosan-polyethylene glycol nanofibre-coated 3D printed scaffold with vancomycin and insulin-like growth factor-1 release for bone repair. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025; 298: 139883.

Atay H.Y. Antibacterial Activity of Chitosan-Based Systems. Functional Chitosan. 2020; 457-89.

Zhu J. Bioactive modification of poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels for tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2010; 31 (17): 4639-56.

Ielo I., Calabrese G., De Luca G., Conoci S. Recent Advances in Hydroxyapatite-Based Biocomposites for Bone Tissue Regeneration in Orthopedics. Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23 (17): 9721.

Sharon V.M., Malaiappan S. Biocompatibility and periodontal regenerative potential of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles from Portunus Sanguinolentus Shells: A crystallographic, morphological, and molecular gene expression analysis. J Dent. 2025; 157: 105762.

Fidler A.L., Boudko S.P., Rokas A., Hudson B.G. The triple helix of collagens - an ancient protein structure that enabled animal multicellularity and tissue evolution. J Cell Sci. 2018; 131 (7): jcs203950.

Selvaraj V., Sekaran S., Dhanasekaran A., Warrier S. Type 1 collagen: Synthesis, structure and key functions in bone mineralization. Differentiation. 2024; 136: 100757.

Seibel M.J. Biochemical markers of bone turnover: part I: biochemistry and variability. Clin Biochem Rev. 2005; 26 (4): 97-122.

Pramanik S., Aggarwal A., Kadi A., Alhomrani M., Alamri A.S., Alsanie W.F., et al. Chitosan alchemy: transforming tissue engineering and wound healing. RSC Adv. 2024; 14 (27): 19219-19256.

Vaidya G., Pramanik S., Kadi A., Rayshan A.R., Abualsoud B.M., Ansari M.J., et al. Injecting hope: chitosan hydrogels as bone regeneration innovators. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2024; 35 (5): 756-797.

Kim Y., Zharkinbekov Z., Raziyeva K., Tabyldiyeva L., Berikova K., Zhumagul D., et al. Chitosan-Based Biomaterials for Tissue Regeneration. Pharmaceutics. 2023; 15 (3): 807.

Kudiyarasu S., Karuppan Perumal M.K., Rajan Renuka R., Manickam Natrajan P. Chitosan composite with mesenchymal stem cells: Properties, mechanism, and its application in bone regeneration. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024; 275 (Pt 1): 133502.

Aguilar A., Zein N., Harmouch E., Hafdi B., Bornert F., Offner D., et al. Application of Chitosan in Bone and Dental Engineering. Molecules. 2019; 24 (16): 3009.

Oh Y., Ahn C.B., Marasinghe M.P.C.K., Je J.Y. Insertion of gallic acid onto chitosan promotes the differentiation of osteoblasts from murine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Int J Biol Macromol. 2021; 183: 1410-1418.