$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The recent interest in 3D culture systems and 3D bioprinting has focused attention on hydrogels and hydrogel composites. These composites serve as viscous yet porous biomimetics and can be composed of up to 99% water content by weight, which is comparable to biological tissues1,2,3. These features of hydrogel composites thereby permit the growth of cells without affecting their viability and function. One such composite is crystalline nanocellulose (CNC), which has been used as a reinforcing material in hydrogel composites, cell scaffolds in the development of biomaterial implants, and in two-dimensional (2D) and 3D in vitro cell culture4,5. For the most part, matrices composed of CNC are not overtly cytotoxic to human corneal epithelial cells6, intestinal epithelial cells7, human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells8, or neuron-like cells9. However, metabolic activity and proliferation of human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells decreases in correlation with the increased viscosity of wood-based nanocellulose composites, suggesting that the composition of the matrix must be carefully tested for its deleterious effects on cell functions8.
Similarly, CNC can induce inflammatory responses in macrophages upon internalization, which could have serious consequences in 3D immune cell culture systems10,11. In fact, there is very little data available on how CNC may influence other immune cell responses, particularly allergic inflammatory responses that are initiated by mast cells. Mast cells are granulated leukocytes that express the high-affinity IgE receptor, FceRI, responsible for activating inflammatory responses to allergens. Their proliferation and differentiation are dependent-upon stem cell factor (SCF), which binds the tyrosine receptor, Kit. Mast cells are derived from bone marrow progenitor cells that enter the circulation and subsequently migrate peripherally to disperse ubiquitously in all human tissues12. As mast cells function in a 3D tissue environment, they are an ideal immune cell candidate for studying immunological processes in in vitro 3D tissue models. However, to date, there is no viable in vitro 3D tissue model containing mast cells.
Due to the highly sensitive nature of mast cells and their propensity to elicit pro-inflammatory responses to external stimuli, careful consideration of the 3D matrix constituents and the bioprinting method of introducing mast cells into the 3D scaffold is required, as discussed further. Tissue constructs can be biofabricated from two broad categories of biomaterials, i.e., bioinks and biomaterial inks. The distinction lies in the fact that bioinks are cell-laden hydrogel composites, whereas biomaterial inks are hydrogel composites that are devoid of cells, as defined by Groll et al.13,14. Hence, 3D constructs printed with bioinks contain cells pre-embedded within the hydrogel matrix, whereas 3D constructs printed with biomaterial inks need to be seeded with cells post-printing. The biofabrication of culture scaffolds from hydrogel-based bioinks/biomaterial inks is most commonly performed using extrusion 3D bioprinters, which extrude the bioink/biomaterial ink through a microscale nozzle under pressure via either a pneumatically or mechanically driven piston14. Extrusion bioprinters fabricate 3D scaffolds by depositing the bioink in 2D cross-sectional patterns that are sequentially stacked upon each other in a 'bottom-up' approach.
To be compatible with extrusion bioprinting, the hydrogel-based bioink/biomaterial ink must possess thixotropic (shear-thinning) properties, whereby the constituent hydrogel polymers of the bioink/biomaterial ink flow like a fluid through a microchannel nozzle when subjected to shear stress, but revert to a viscous, gel-like state upon removal of the shear stress15. Due to their high water content, the polymers of hydrogel-based bioinks/biomaterial inks must be crosslinked, either physically or covalently, to maintain the architecture and structural integrity of the 3D bioprinted structure. In the case of cell-laden bioinks, the cells are directly subjected to chemical stresses during the crosslinking process. The process of extruding cells encapsulated within the bioink hydrogel matrix also subjects the cells to shear stress, which can lead to reduced viability and/or cell death. Once the 3D tissue model has been bioprinted, it is difficult to discriminate between the levels of cytotoxicity elicited by the hydrogel matrix itself and the extrusion and crosslinking processes, respectively. This is particularly challenging in the context of 3D scaffolds where the cells are pre-embedded within the hydrogel matrix, thus making it difficult to remove the cells for subsequent analyses, which would be detrimental to the viability of mast cells.
A gentler approach to generating 3D tissue constructs containing mast cells involves seeding the cells into pre-printed, porous biomaterial ink 3D scaffolds from a cell culture suspension, which leverages the innate ability of mast cells to migrate from the circulation into peripheral tissues. The benefits of this cell seeding approach are two-fold: (i) the mast cells are not subjected to shear and chemical stresses from the extrusion and crosslinking processes, respectively, and (ii) the cells can be easily removed from the 3D scaffold after exposure by gentle washing for analysis without adversely affecting their viability. The additional benefit of seeding and analyzing the cell viability of mast cells on 3D bioprinted, porous hydrogel scaffolds as opposed to 2D hydrogel discs is that the 3D bioprinted hydrogel scaffolds recapitulate microscale topographical features of in vivo tissues, which are not present in bulk, 2D planar hydrogel discs. This approach is a suitable, rapid, and cost-effective approach to determine the potentially catastrophic cytotoxic effects of candidate bioink hydrogel matrices on mast cells, as well as other immunological cells, prior to investment in costly 3D tissue engineering experiments.