BioprintingExtrusionCurated metadata

Design and Implementation of an Accessible 3D Bioprinter: Benchmarking the Performance of a Home-Made Bioprinter against a Professional Bioprinter

If files are shared, this is a solid ‘DIY vs commercial’ benchmarking reference.

Open-sourcemedium skillmoderate docsCrossrefOpenAlex
Publication data

Crossref and OpenAlex

Publication record

Matched by title · retrieved 2026-07-21

Abstract

The tremendous application potential of 3D bioprinting in the biomedical field is witnessed by the ever-increasing interest in this technology over the past few years. In particular, the possibility of obtaining 3D cellular models that mimic tissues with precision and reproducibility represents a definitive advance for in vitro studies dealing with the biological mechanisms of cell growth, death and proliferation and is at the basis of the responses of healthy and pathological tissues to drugs and therapies. However, the impact of 3D bioprinting on research is limited by the high costs of professional 3D bioprinters, which represent an obstacle to the widespread access and usability of this technology. In this work, we present a 3D bioprinter that was developed in-house by modifying a low-cost commercial 3D printer by replacing the default extruder used to print plastic filaments with a custom-made syringe extruder that is suitable for printing bioinks. The modifications made to the 3D printer include adjusting the size of the extruder to accommodate a 1 mL syringe and reducing the extruder’s size above the printer. To validate the performance of the home-made bioprinter, some main printing characteristics, the cell vitality and the possibility of bioprinting CAD-designed constructs were benchmarked against a renowned professional 3D bioprinter by RegenHu. According to our findings, our in-house 3D bioprinter was mostly successful in printing a complex glioblastoma tumor model with good performances, and it managed to maintain a cell viability that was comparable to that achieved by a professional bioprinter. This suggests that an accessible open-source 3D bioprinter could be a viable option for research and development (R&D) laboratories interested in pre-commercial 3D bioprinting advancements.

Bibliographic details

Published
2023-09-11
Journal/source
Applied Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
DOI
10.3390/app131810213
Type
journal-article
Language
en
Volume / issue
13 / 18
Pages
10213
ISSN
2076-3417

Access and metrics

Open access
Yes
OA status
gold
License
cc-by
Version
publishedVersion
Cited by
2
References
20
Retracted
No

Authors and affiliations

  1. P. D'AtanasioNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development
  2. Noemi Fiaschini
  3. Antonio RinaldiNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development
  4. Alessandro ZambottiNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development
  5. L. Cantini
  6. Mariateresa MancusoNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development
  7. Francesca AntonelliCorresponding authorNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development

Topics and keywords

3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesCell Image Analysis Techniques3D bioprintingNanotechnologyBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringTissue engineering

Funding

  • internal ENEA “Proof of Concept” (PoC) program · POR-FESR 2014–2020
  • MAIA—Materiali Avanzati in una Infrastruttura Aperta · POR-FESR 2014–2020