| Literature DB >> 26106596 |
Vladimir S Komlev1, Vladimir K Popov2, Anton V Mironov2, Alexander Yu Fedotov1, Anastasia Yu Teterina1, Igor V Smirnov1, Ilya Y Bozo3, Vera A Rybko4, Roman V Deev5.
Abstract
Biocompatible calcium phosphate ceramic grafts are able of supporting new bone formation in appropriate environment. The major limitation of these materials usage for medical implants is the absence of accessible methods for their patient-specific fabrication. 3D printing methodology is an excellent approach to overcome the limitation supporting effective and fast fabrication of individual complex bone substitutes. Here, we proposed a relatively simple route for 3D printing of octacalcium phosphates (OCP) in complexly shaped structures by the combination of inkjet printing with post-treatment methodology. The printed OCP blocks were further implanted in the developed cranial bone defect followed by histological evaluation. The obtained result confirmed the potential of the developed OCP bone substitutes, which allowed 2.5-time reducing of defect's diameter at 6.5 months in a region where native bone repair is extremely inefficient.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; bone graft; ceramics; in vivo test; octacalcium phosphate; osteoconductivity; tricalcium phosphate
Year: 2015 PMID: 26106596 PMCID: PMC4459096 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
Figure 1Custom-designed 3D printer. 1, 3D printer frame; 2, printing head; 3, stuffer with spreader; 4, Z-piston; 5, building box; 6, stepper motors.
Figure 2(A) XRD chart of the transformation of 3D printed TCP (1) to DCPD samples soaked in calcium nitrate solution during 168 h (2) and to OCP samples in sodium acetate during 168 h (3). SEM photomicrographs of 3D printed samples: (B1) TCP (pre-treated material), (B2) DCPD (after soaking in calcium nitrate solution at 168 h), and (B3) OCP (after soaking in sodium acetate at 168 h).
Figure 3Compressive strength of 3D printed samples before and after chemical treatment.
Figure 4(A) General view of 3D printed samples to be implanted. (B) Photomicrograph of the cranial defect produced. (C) 2D slices in different areas. (D) 3D CT reconstruction for 3D printed block at 6.5 months after implantation.
Figure 5Histological slides of the rabbit’s calvaria bones, slice made in the coronal plane: (A) Histotopogram, including two regions of newly formed bone tissue growing toward each other; (B) the central area, where a fragment of the woven bone tissue formed on the implant surface without fibrous tissue interlayer; (C) the central area with pore in the 3D printed implant a fibrous tissue with single vascular vessels grow out through (*); (D) a fragment of the marginal part of the regenerate where newly formed bone tissue grew directly on the 3D printed block surface; (E) the marginal part of the regenerate having pronounced newly formed bone trabecule retaining the implant. 1, 3D printed block made of octacalcium phosphate; 2, newly formed bone tissue; *vascular vessel. Staining: hematoxylin and eosin, paraffin sections. Magnification: (A) ×4, (C–E) ×100, (B) ×200.