9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Rapid prototyped porous nickel-titanium scaffolds as bone substitutes.

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          While calcium phosphate-based ceramics are currently the most widely used materials in bone repair, they generally lack tensile strength for initial load bearing. Bulk titanium is the gold standard of metallic implant materials, but does not match the mechanical properties of the surrounding bone, potentially leading to problems of fixation and bone resorption. As an alternative, nickel-titanium alloys possess a unique combination of mechanical properties including a relatively low elastic modulus, pseudoelasticity, and high damping capacity, matching the properties of bone better than any other metallic material. With the ultimate goal of fabricating porous implants for spinal, orthopedic and dental applications, nickel-titanium substrates were fabricated by means of selective laser melting. The response of human mesenchymal stromal cells to the nickel-titanium substrates was compared to mesenchymal stromal cells cultured on clinically used titanium. Selective laser melted titanium as well as surface-treated nickel-titanium and titanium served as controls. Mesenchymal stromal cells had similar proliferation rates when cultured on selective laser melted nickel-titanium, clinically used titanium, or controls. Osteogenic differentiation was similar for mesenchymal stromal cells cultured on the selected materials, as indicated by similar gene expression levels of bone sialoprotein and osteocalcin. Mesenchymal stromal cells seeded and cultured on porous three-dimensional selective laser melted nickel-titanium scaffolds homogeneously colonized the scaffold, and following osteogenic induction, filled the scaffold's pore volume with extracellular matrix. The combination of bone-related mechanical properties of selective laser melted nickel-titanium with its cytocompatibility and support of osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells highlights its potential as a superior bone substitute as compared to clinically used titanium.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration.

          Osteoinduction is the process by which osteogenesis is induced. It is a phenomenon regularly seen in any type of bone healing process. Osteoinduction implies the recruitment of immature cells and the stimulation of these cells to develop into preosteoblasts. In a bone healing situation such as a fracture, the majority of bone healing is dependent on osteoinduction. Osteoconduction means that bone grows on a surface. This phenomenon is regularly seen in the case of bone implants. Implant materials of low biocompatibility such as copper, silver and bone cement shows little or no osteoconduction. Osseointegration is the stable anchorage of an implant achieved by direct bone-to-implant contact. In craniofacial implantology, this mode of anchorage is the only one for which high success rates have been reported. Osseointegration is possible in other parts of the body, but its importance for the anchorage of major arthroplasties is under debate. Ingrowth of bone in a porous-coated prosthesis may or may not represent osseointegration.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Bone tissue engineering: state of the art and future trends.

            Although several major progresses have been introduced in the field of bone regenerative medicine during the years, current therapies, such as bone grafts, still have many limitations. Moreover, and in spite of the fact that material science technology has resulted in clear improvements in the field of bone substitution medicine, no adequate bone substitute has been developed and hence large bone defects/injuries still represent a major challenge for orthopaedic and reconstructive surgeons. It is in this context that TE has been emerging as a valid approach to the current therapies for bone regeneration/substitution. In contrast to classic biomaterial approach, TE is based on the understanding of tissue formation and regeneration, and aims to induce new functional tissues, rather than just to implant new spare parts. The present review pretends to give an exhaustive overview on all components needed for making bone tissue engineering a successful therapy. It begins by giving the reader a brief background on bone biology, followed by an exhaustive description of all the relevant components on bone TE, going from materials to scaffolds and from cells to tissue engineering strategies, that will lead to "engineered" bone. Scaffolds processed by using a methodology based on extrusion with blowing agents.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: a systematic review.

              To analyse possible effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration. Our analyses were centred on a PubMed search that identified 1184 publications of assumed relevance; of those, 1064 had to be disregarded because they did not accurately present in vivo data on bone response to surface topography. The remaining 120 papers were read and analysed, after removal of an additional 20 papers that mainly dealt with CaP-coated and Zr implants; 100 papers remained and formed the basis for this paper. The bone response to differently configurated surfaces was mainly evaluated by histomorphometry (bone-to-implant contact), removal torque and pushout/pullout tests. A huge number of the experimental investigations have demonstrated that the bone response was influenced by the implant surface topography; smooth (S(a) 1-2 microm) surfaces showed stronger bone responses than rough (S(a)>2 microm) in some studies. One limitation was that it was difficult to compare many studies because of the varying quality of surface evaluations; a surface termed 'rough' in one study was not uncommonly referred to as 'smooth' in another; many investigators falsely assumed that surface preparation per se identified the roughness of the implant; and many other studies used only qualitative techniques such as SEM. Furthermore, filtering techniques differed or only height parameters (S(a), R(a)) were reported. * Surface topography influences bone response at the micrometre level. * Some indications exist that surface topography influences bone response at the nanometre level. * The majority of published papers present an inadequate surface characterization. * Measurement and evaluation techniques need to be standardized. * Not only height descriptive parameters but also spatial and hybrid ones should be used.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Tissue Eng
                Journal of tissue engineering
                SAGE Publications
                2041-7314
                2014
                : 5
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Departments of Biomedicine and Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland ; University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, School of Life Sciences, Institute for Medical and Analytical Technologies, Gründenstrasse 40, 4132 Muttenz, Switzerland.
                [2 ] University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, School of Life Sciences, Institute for Medical and Analytical Technologies, Gründenstrasse 40, 4132 Muttenz, Switzerland ; Biomaterials Science Center, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
                [3 ] Laboratory for Surface Science and Technology, Department of Materials, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland ; Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy.
                [4 ] Biomaterials Science Center, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
                [5 ] University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, School of Life Sciences, Institute for Medical and Analytical Technologies, Gründenstrasse 40, 4132 Muttenz, Switzerland.
                [6 ] Departments of Biomedicine and Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
                Article
                10.1177_2041731414540674
                10.1177/2041731414540674
                4221926
                25383165
                f208011f-0620-4964-b67a-ff05793c37a2
                History

                Bone tissue engineering,nickel–titanium,osteogenic differentiation,scaffold,selective laser melting

                Comments

                Comment on this article