26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mechanics Predicts Effective Critical-Size Bone Regeneration Using 3D-Printed Bioceramic Scaffolds

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          BACKGROUND:

          3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds have gained popularity due to their controlled microarchitecture and their proven biocompatibility. However, their high brittleness makes their surgical implementation complex for weight-bearing bone treatments. Thus, they would require difficult-to-instrument rigid internal fixations that limit a rigorous evaluation of the regeneration progress through the analysis of mechanic-structural parameters.

          METHODS:

          We investigated the compatibility of flexible fixations with fragile ceramic implants, and if mechanical monitoring techniques are applicable to bone tissue engineering applications. Tissue engineering experiments were performed on 8 ovine metatarsi. A 15 mm bone segment was directly replaced with a hydroxyapatite scaffold and stabilized by an instrumented Ilizarov-type external fixator. Several in vivo monitoring techniques were employed to assess the mechanical and structural progress of the tissue.

          RESULTS:

          The applied surgical protocol succeeded in combining external fixators and subject-specific bioceramic scaffolds without causing fatal fractures of the implant due to stress concentrator. The bearing capacity of the treated limb was initially altered, quantifying a 28–56% reduction of the ground reaction force, which gradually normalized during the consolidation phase. A faster recovery was reported in the bearing capacity, stiffening and bone mineral density of the callus. It acquired a predominant mechanical role over the fixator in the distribution of internal forces after one post-surgical month.

          CONCLUSION:

          The bioceramic scaffold significantly accelerated in vivo the bone formation compared to other traditional alternatives in the literature (e.g., distraction osteogenesis). In addition, the implemented assessment techniques allowed an accurate quantitative evaluation of the bone regeneration through mechanical and imaging parameters.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • 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: found
            Is Open Access

            Fabrication of Scaffolds for Bone-Tissue Regeneration

            The present article describes the state of the art in the rapidly developing field of bone tissue engineering, where many disciplines, such as material science, mechanical engineering, clinical medicine and genetics, are interconnected. The main objective is to restore and improve the function of bone tissue by scaffolds, providing a suitable environment for tissue regeneration and repair. Strategies and materials used in oral regenerative therapies correspond to techniques generally used in bone tissue engineering. Researchers are focusing on developing and improving new materials to imitate the native biological neighborhood as authentically as possible. The most promising is a combination of cells and matrices (scaffolds) that can be fabricated from different kinds of materials. This review summarizes currently available materials and manufacturing technologies of scaffolds for bone-tissue regeneration.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Review of bone graft and bone substitutes with an emphasis on fracture surgeries

              Background Autogenous bone graft is the gold standard bone graft material. However, due to limitations of supply and morbidity associated with autograft harvest, various bone substitutes have been considered. This article aims to review the properties of the bone graft and various bone substitutes currently available in orthopedic surgery. Main body Synthetic bone substitutes consist of hydroxyapatite, tricalcium phosphate, calcium sulfate, or a combination of these minerals. Synthetic porous substitutes share several advantages over allografts, including unlimited supply, easy sterilization, and storage. However, they also have some disadvantages, such as brittle properties, variable rates of resorption, and poor performance in some clinical conditions. Recently, attention has been drawn to osteoinductive materials, such as demineralized bone matrix and bone morphogenetic proteins. Conclusion Despite tremendous efforts toward developing autograft alternatives, a single ideal bone graft substitute has not been developed. The surgeon should understand the properties of each bone graft substitute to facilitate appropriate selection in each specific clinical situation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                pbcarmona@us.es
                Journal
                Tissue Eng Regen Med
                Tissue Eng Regen Med
                Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
                Springer Nature Singapore (Singapore )
                1738-2696
                2212-5469
                22 August 2023
                22 August 2023
                October 2023
                : 20
                : 6
                : 893-904
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería, Universidad de Sevilla, Avenida Camino de los Descubrimientos s/n, ( https://ror.org/03yxnpp24) 41092 Seville, Spain
                [2 ]Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería, Universidad de Huelva, ( https://ror.org/03a1kt624) Huelva, Spain
                [3 ]Departamento Medicina y Cirugía Animal, Universidad de Córdoba, ( https://ror.org/05yc77b46) Campus Universitario de Rabanales, Córdoba, Spain
                [4 ]GRID grid.9224.d, ISNI 0000 0001 2168 1229, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), , Universidad de Sevilla, ; Seville, Spain
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7605-5812
                Article
                577
                10.1007/s13770-023-00577-2
                10519928
                37606809
                cf078af3-1429-40af-95e0-afc1d4ac32ed
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 9 May 2023
                : 25 June 2023
                : 11 July 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003329, Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad;
                Award ID: PID2020-113790RB-I00
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Universidad de Sevilla
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                © Korean Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Society 2023

                tissue engineering,bioceramic scaffold,mechanobiology,computerized tomography,bone mineral density

                Comments

                Comment on this article