$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
This protocol is aimed at the development of a triple-layered leaflet scaffold destined for use in cardiovascular tissue engineering of heart valves. It mimics the collagen configuration of the three layers in the native human heart valve. Each layer consists of fibers with an overall diameter of 4.1 ± 1.6 µm (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Fiber characteristics. Analysis of fibers: Total fiber count; Diameter in µm: mean, mode, standard deviation, minimal diameter, maximal diameter. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The leaflet templates are designed to fit a Ø 24 mm aortic valve prosthesis (Figure 2C). After drying, the leaflet scaffolds kept their shape of a 3D heart valve cusp (Figure 3A).

Figure 2: Electrospinning setup. (A) Assembled 3D-printed collector in the rotary setup; (B) CAD rendering of the 3D-printable collector; (C) CAD rendering of the heart valve leaflet negative shown in B; triangle indicates zoomed-in part. Abbreviation: CAD = computer-aided design. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
SEM imaging was used to assess the aligned and unaligned layers (TEMP F3512-21). Photographs were taken at 100x, 500x, and 2,000x magnification in three different locations on a scaffold. Aligned fiber scaffolds appear with a smooth surface and strict orientation in the circumferential direction (Figure 3B). Visual analysis of the 2,000x image with respect to the fiber orientation confirms the primary alignment of the fibers (Figure 3C). Unaligned fiber scaffolds show a similarly smooth surface compared to the aligned fibers. Fiber orientation is disordered, with many prominent intersections between fibers (Figure 3D). Subsequent visual analysis confirms the unalignment of fibers with no primary orientation visible (Figure 3E).

Figure 3: Electrospun leaflet and SEM imaging. (A) Electrospun multilayered leaflet and 3D-printed leaflet collector; (B) SEM image of unaligned fibers (magnification 1,000x); (C) Fiber orientation analysis of unaligned fibers; (D) SEM image of aligned fibers (magnification 1,000x); (E) Fiber orientation analysis of aligned fibers. Scale bars = 10 mm (A), 100 µm (B, D). Abbreviation: SEM = scanning electron microscopy. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Imaging of fluorescent dyed multilayered scaffolds revealed three individual layers with distinct fiber orientations (Figure 4D). The bottom layer (Figure 4A; blue) shows aligned fibers in horizontal orientation with very little intersection between the fibers. The middle layer (Figure 4B; green) shows unaligned fibers with no primary fiber orientation. The top layer (Figure 4C; red) shows aligned fibers in a perpendicular orientation. Visual analysis of the top and bottom layers reveals an average angle between the two layers of 89°, which is in accordance with the 90° rotation of the collector during the spinning process (Figure 4E).

Figure 4: Fluorescence microscopy of multilayered scaffold. (A) Fluorescence image of the first layer with primary orientation from bottom left to top right; (B) Fluorescence image of the second layer with unaligned fiber orientation; (C) Fluorescence image of the third layer with primary orientation from bottom right to top left; (D) Fluorescence image of all three layers combined in one scaffold; (E) Fiber orientation analysis for all three layers (Layer 1: blue; Layer 2: green; Layer 3: red); magnification = 400x (A-D); scale bars = 100 µm (A-D). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Thickness measurement was done on 21 samples (Figure 5A) (TEMP F3510-21). All samples were created applying the same parameters. Temperature and humidity could differ between 20.3 °C and 26.1 °C and 35% and 55% humidity, respectively. The results showed a relatively linear increase in thickness of ~2.65 µm per min.
Another experiment showed the consistency of the results after 60 min of spinning under matching parameters (Figure 5B). Humidity and temperature could differ between 35% and 50% humidity and 20.3 °C to 26.1 °C, respectively. The results were scaffolds between 126 and 181 µm in thickness. The average thickness was 151.11 ± 13.17 µm. The increase in thickness was ~2.52 µm per min, on average.

Figure 5: Thickness measurement. (A) Thickness of scaffolds per time spun; n = 21; Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.653; p** = 0.00132; (B) Thickness of samples after 60 min; n = 13; red line: mean. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Tensile tests for aligned and unaligned fiber scaffolds were performed in two directions, along the circumferential direction and perpendicular to it. Each grout consisted of 15 specimens. Samples were taken out of plane scaffolds according to DIN 53504:2017-03. The thickness was measured at three different spots on each sample and used to calculate the maximal force values per square mm.
The thickness values lay between 0.03 and 0.2 mm. The comparison of ultimate tensile strength revealed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between orientations for the aligned fiber scaffolds (Figure 6A). The scaffolds reached a maximum strength of 12.26 ± 2.59 N/mm2 along the circumferential orientation. The tensile strength was reduced to 3.86 ± 1.08 N/mm2 in the perpendicular direction.
Unaligned fiber scaffolds show no difference in the ultimate tensile strength for the different orientations (F1: 7.19 ± 1.75 N/mm2, F2: 7.54 ± 1.59 N/mm2; p = 0.60). The comparative analysis of the elongation at break for the aligned fiber scaffolds revealed significant differences (p < 0.001) in distensibility between the directions (Figure 6B). The extensibility reached 187.01 ± 39.37% in the circumferential direction compared to 107.16 ± 30.04% in the perpendicular direction.
In contrast, the elongation at break for the unaligned fiber mats revealed uniform extensibility in both directions (F1: 269.74 ± 24.78 % ; F2: 285.01 ± 25.58 %; p = 0.69). Representative stress-strain curves show huge differences in the behavior of the material, depending on the direction in which the tensile force is applied. Unaligned fiber mats showed linear elastic behavior, while aligned fiber mats showed nonlinearity in the axial direction.

Figure 6: Tensile tests of aligned and unaligned fibers. (A) Ultimate tensile strength for aligned and unaligned fiber mats in circumferential and axial directions; n = 15; (B) Elongation at break for aligned and unaligned fiber mats in circumferential and axial directions; n = 15; (C) Representative stress-strain curves of aligned and unaligned scaffolds, pulled in axial and circumferential directions, respectively. (***p < 0.001). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| | | Manufacturing Metrics | | | |
| Name | Material | Amount | Total Time | Total Weight [g] | Cost [€ per kg] | Total Cost |
| 1 | Specimen_Mount_A | Regular PLA | 2 | 18:19 | 159 | 51.33 € | 8.16 € |
| 2 | Specimen_Mount_B | Regular PLA | 2 | 19:42 | 161 | 51.33 € | 8.26 € |
| 3 | Collector Flange | Conductive PLA | 2 | 10:40 | 95 | 99.98 € | 9.50 € |
| 4 | Leaflet_Inlet | Conductive PLA | 9 | 05:32 | 31 | 99.98 € | 3.10 € |
| Total | | | | | | 29.02 € |
Table 1: Manufacturing metrics. Table specifying quantity, manufacturing time, amount of material needed, and costs for 3D-printed parts. Abbreviation: PLA = polylactic acid.
Supplemental File 1: Adaptable collector flange. Step-file to adapt and print collector flange. Please click here to download this File.
Supplemental File 2: Leaflet template. STL-file to print leaflet template. Please click here to download this File.
Supplemental File 3: Specimen mount A. STL-file to print specimen mount A. Please click here to download this File.
Supplemental File 4: Specimen mount B. STL-file to print specimen mount B. Please click here to download this File.
Supplemental File 5: Collector flange. STL-file to print collector flange. Please click here to download this File.
Supplemental File 6: Connecting metal rod. Technical drawing to construct connecting metal rods. Please click here to download this File.