## 4 Discussion  
This study focused on developing novel biodegradable polymer meshes using advanced manufacturing techniques. We optimized the MEW prototype's printing parameters with PCL pellets, leading to several key findings. Both non-medical- and medical-grade PCL demonstrated stable performance during printing, allowing precise control over mesh production with various diameters. The key factors affecting the printing process include temperature, speed, and voltage. Low temperatures (e.g., 160 \({}^{\circ}\)C) increase material viscosity, reducing flow rate and causing filament interruptions. High temperatures (e.g., 220 \({}^{\circ}\)C) decrease viscosity, leading to larger filament diameters and formation issues. Very low speeds (300 mm/min) cause filament winding, while very high speeds (2400 mm/min) result in smaller diameters or filament breaks. Low voltages (e.g., 4 kV) result in a weak electric field, producing inconsistent filaments. High voltages (e.g., 10 kV) accelerate extrusion but can cause larger filaments and excessive winding. Both low voltages with high speed and high voltages with low speed can degrade print quality. Increasing the distance between the nozzle and collector leads to thinner filaments due to additional stretching, while a smaller distance causes instability and filament defects. These findings highlight the importance of carefully adjusting printing parameters to achieve consistent and high-quality meshes. After the initial calibration of the equipment, we printed meshes using both non-medical- and medical-grade materials in square-shaped and diagonal-shaped geometries, with diameters of 80 \(\upmu\)m, 160 \(\upmu\)m, and 240 \(\upmu\)m. Mechanical tests were conducted to compare these meshes with a commercial mesh (Restorelle(r)) and vaginal sheep tissue. Initially, comparisons of the square-shaped mesh using both non-medical- and medical-grade materials revealed significant differences. The non-medical-grade material consistently exhibited a higher maximum stress across all mesh geometries. This discrepancy is likely due to variations in manufacturing processes, purity levels, molecular weight distributions, and the specific additives used in each grade of PCL [39]. Non-medical-grade PCL, which may not adhere to stringent standards, can show variations in mechanical strength, elasticity, and other properties [39]. The main findings include the following: (1) Commercial mesh performance: the Restorelle(r) mesh displayed increased stiffness at  
Figure 8: The uniaxial tensile response of the optimally produced mesh is shown within the comfort zone, alongside the behavior of sheep vaginal tissue and the Restorelle® mesh. Note: MG_80_1L refers to meshes printed with medical-grade PCL with one layer; TG_80_1L refers to meshes printed with non-medical-grade PCL with one layer. higher strain levels, which could be a disadvantage in replicating the mechanical behavior of vaginal tissue. (2) Layer effect: meshes with two printed layers demonstrated higher stress values compared to those with a single layer. This increased stiffness with additional layers aligns with previous studies, indicating that multi-layered meshes offer enhanced strength and durability [14; 19; 20; 37]. (3) Material comparison: the square-shaped medical-grade PCL mesh is the most suitable option for approximating vaginal tissue properties. It demonstrates a Secant's modulus with only a 13.7% difference from that of vaginal tissue, indicating a close alignment in stiffness. Additionally, its maximum stress of 0.29 MPa suggests it can handle significant forces while maintaining performance. Although the diagonal-shaped mesh shows promise with a stress difference of 14% and may better mimic mechanical response, its larger discrepancy in Secant's modulus (45%) compared to vaginal tissue makes it less ideal.