Preprint / Version 1

Comparative Analysis of Two-dimensional and Three-dimensional Stem Cell culture: Implications for Applications in the biomedical field

How do 2D and 3D culture systems result in different stem cell abilities, what are the challenges in the standardization of 3D systems for stem cell expansion and the strategies that have been proposed to overcome them?

##article.authors##

  • Jana Nasser Cairo University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58445/rars.2960

Keywords:

Stem cells, Biomedical research, Stem cell cultures

Abstract

Stem cell expansion is a crucial part of regenerative medicine and modern biomedical research. Cultivating a large number of high-quality stem cells is essential to the development of cell therapies for conditions such as heart failure and neurodegenerative diseases, as well as applications in disease modeling and drug screening.1 In vitro, stem cells are grown either on flat 2 dimensional surfaces (ex: petri dish) or within three-dimensional systems (ex: organoids). While 2D systems are currently the standard, 3D culture systems are gaining recognition for their ability to better mimic the cells’ natural microenvironments. However, widespread adoption of 3D systems is restricted by issues in reproducibility and standardization, which must be addressed to achieve their intended benefits. Overcoming these challenges would have an incredible effect for both research and clinical adaptations, potentially improving the physiological relevance, efficiency, and scalability of stem cell-based therapies.1 2 This research discusses and compares the characteristics, advantages, and limitations of both 2D and 3D stem cell culture systems, emphasizing their implications for regenerative medicine, disease modeling, and drug discovery.

References

Li, M., Cui, J., & Tang, R. (2021). From 2D to 3D: Advances of technology and instrumentation for stem cell culture in vitro. 2021 IEEE 15th International Conference on Electronic Measurement & Instruments (ICEMI), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMI52946.2021.9679615

Habanjar, O., Diab-Assaf, M., Caldefie-Chezet, F., & Delort, L. (2021). 3D cell culture systems: Tumor application, advantages, and disadvantages. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22(22), 12200. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms222212200

Yen, B. L., Hsieh, C.-C., Hsu, P.-J., Chang, C.-C., Wang, L.-T., & Yen, M.-L. (2023). Three dimensional spheroid culture of human mesenchymal stem cells: Offering therapeutic advantages and in vitro glimpses of the in vivo state. Stem Cells Translational Medicine, 12(5), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1093/stcltm/szad011

Liu, K.-C., Chen, Y.-C., Hsieh, C.-F., Wang, M.-H., Zhong, M.-X., & Cheng, N.-C. (2024). Scaffold free 3D culture systems for stem cell-based tissue regeneration. APL Bioengineering, 8(4), 041501. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0225807

Duval, K., Grover, H., Han, L. H., et al. (2017). Modeling physiological events in 2D vs. 3D cell culture. Physiology, 32(4), 266–277. https://doi.org/10.1152/physiol.00036.2016

Yin, Q., Xu, N., Xu, D., et al. (2020). Comparison of senescence-related changes between three- and two-dimensional cultured adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 11, 226. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-020-01744-1

Cuesta-Gomez, N., Verhoeff, K., Dadheech, N., et al. (2023). Suspension culture improves iPSC expansion and pluripotency phenotype. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 14, 154. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-023-03382-9

Couvrette, L. J., Walker, K. L. A., Bui, T. V., & Pelling, A. E. (2023). Plant cellulose as a substrate for 3D neural stem cell culture. Bioengineering, 10(11), 1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10111309

Park, J. H., Lee, J.-R., Park, S., Kim, Y.-J., Yoon, J.-K., Park, H. S., Hyun, J., Joung, Y. K., Lee, T. I., & Bhang, S. H. (2023). Subaqueous 3D stem cell spheroid levitation culture using anti-gravity bioreactor based on sound wave superposition. Biomaterials Research, 27, 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40824-023-00383-w

. Zehtabian, K. (2025). In vitro neuronal cell culture: Challenges to axon and dendrite growth and the path toward neural regeneration. International Journal of Endovascular Treatment and Innovative Techniques, 6(1), 6–9. https://doi.org/10.61797/ijetit.v6i1.461

Van Zundert, I., Maenhoudt, N., De Vriendt, S., Vankelecom, H., Fortuni, B., & Rocha, S. (2022). Fluorescence imaging of 3D cell models with subcellular resolution. Bio-Protocol, 12(14), e4469. https://doi.org/10.21769/BioProtoc.4469

Pangjantuk, A., Kaokaen, P., Kunhorm, P., et al. (2024). 3D culture of alginate-hyaluronic acid hydrogel supports the stemness of human mesenchymal stem cells. Scientific Reports, 14, 4436. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54912-1

Jensen, C., & Teng, Y. (2020). Is it time to start transitioning from 2D to 3D cell culture? Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 7, 33. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2020.00033

Edmondson, R., Broglie, J. J., Adcock, A. F., & Yang, L. (2014). Three-dimensional cell culture systems and their applications in drug discovery and cell-based biosensors. Assay and Drug Development Technologies, 12(4), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1089/adt.2014.573

Abbas, Z. N., Al-Saffar, A. Z., Jasim, S. M., & Sulaiman, G. M. (2023). Comparative analysis between 2D and 3D colorectal cancer culture models for insights into cellular morphological and transcriptomic variations. Scientific Reports, 13, 18380. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45144-w

Downloads

Posted

2025-08-24

Categories