Meniscus Bioprinting Technology Roadmap

Meniscus lesions represent a challenge for medicine in view of the high occurrence, the limited intrinsic regenerative potential of the meniscus and the economic and social impact associated with the restricted results of current treatments. One of the most promising alternatives is the development of meniscus engineered substitutes (MES) through 3D bioprinting. To define strategies for technologies development, processes, and products necessary for MES bioprinting, innovation management and planning tools, such as roadmaps (RMap), can be used. This research aimed to build an RMap to portray the scientific and technological contemporary status related to tissue engineering strategies for bioinks development (BI) for MES bioprinting. For this, the search for scientific publications were carried out in journals (Science Direct, PubMed, and Web Of Science) and patents (Google patents and EspaceNet) using as strings the combination Meniscus AND Scaffold AND Bioprinting AND Tissue Engineering. The search was restricted to original scientific articles and patents published between 2015 and 2021. The selected publications were carefully analyzed to identify the technologies developed (bioprinting process, biomaterials, and cells). The information was compiled and compared with the biomechanical performance criteria of a meniscus, to infer the degree of biomimicry and the potential of each innovation proposal. 9 articles and 4 patents were selected. Except for one publication using the inkjet printing method, all explored the extrusion method. Only 4 of the publications incorporated cellular contingent, predominantly the use of stem cells derived from fat and bone marrow. Regarding biopolymers, polycaprolactone (PCL) predominated, used alone or in association with collagen, gelatin methacrylate, alginate, poly(lactic‐co‐glycolic acid) and decellularized extracellular matrix. It is noteworthy that PCL generates a rigid matrix, technically incompatible with the biomechanical nature of the meniscus. It means that the proposals under development have at least one characteristic that could impede the future use of the under‐development technologies. This finding reinforces the importance of using technological planning techniques to support biotechnology research. The Rmap obtained describes the frontier technologies of BI knowledge for MES bioprinting, showing incompatibility between the MES biomechanical performance characteristics and the properties necessary to achieve faithful biomimicry concerning biological menisci. The expectation is that this Rmap will contribute to the development of new BI strategies, focusing on the selection and/or modification of biomaterials and cells, to achieve the biomimetic performance of MES.