Literature DB >> 29020507

Custom Repair of Mandibular Bone Defects with 3D Printed Bioceramic Scaffolds.

H Shao1,2, M Sun3, F Zhang4, A Liu5, Y He1,2, J Fu1,2, X Yang6, H Wang3, Z Gou6.   

Abstract

Implanting artificial biomaterial implants into alveolar bone defects with individual shape and appropriate mechanical strength is still a challenge. In this study, bioceramic scaffolds, which can precisely match the mandibular defects in macro and micro, were manufactured by the 3-dimensional (3D) printing technique according to the computed tomography (CT) image. To evaluate the stimulatory effect of the material substrate on bone tissue regeneration in situ in a rabbit mandibular alveolar bone defect model, implants made with the newly developed, mechanically strong ~10% Mg-substituted wollastonite (Ca90%Mg10%SiO3; CSi-Mg10) were fabricated, implanted into the bone defects, and compared with implants made with the typical Ca-phosphate and Ca-silicate porous bioceramics, such as β-tricalcium phosphate (TCP), wollastonite (CaSiO3; CSi), and bredigite (Bred). The initial physicochemical tests indicated that although the CSi-Mg10 scaffolds had the largest pore dimension, they had the lowest porosity mainly due to the significant linear shrinkage of the scaffolds during sintering. Compared with the sparingly dissolvable TCP scaffolds (~2% weight loss) and superfast dissolvable (in Tris buffer within 6 wk) pure CSi and Bred scaffolds (~12% and ~14% weight loss, respectively), the CSi-Mg10 exhibited a mild in vitro biodissolution and moderate weight loss of ~7%. In addition, the CSi-Mg10 scaffolds showed a considerable initial flexural strength (31 MPa) and maintained very high flexural resistance during soaking in Tris buffer. The in vivo results revealed that the CSi-Mg10 scaffolds have markedly higher osteogenic capability than those on the TCP, CSi, and Bred scaffolds after 16 wk. These results suggest a promising potential application of customized CSi-Mg10 3D robocast scaffolds in the clinic, especially for repair of alveolar bone defects.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3-dimensional printing; alveolar bone grafting; bone regeneration; ceramics; dental implants; mandibular reconstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29020507     DOI: 10.1177/0022034517734846

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent Res        ISSN: 0022-0345            Impact factor:   6.116


  17 in total

Review 1.  3D printing in cell culture systems and medical applications.

Authors:  Max J Lerman; Josephine Lembong; Greg Gillen; John P Fisher
Journal:  Appl Phys Rev       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 19.162

Review 2.  3D bioprinting and craniofacial regeneration.

Authors:  Ruby Dwivedi; Divya Mehrotra
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2020-08-14

3.  Innovations in Craniofacial Bone and Periodontal Tissue Engineering - From Electrospinning to Converged Biofabrication.

Authors:  Zeynep Aytac; Nileshkumar Dubey; Arwa Daghrery; Jessica A Ferreira; Isaac J de Souza Araújo; Miguel Castilho; Jos Malda; Marco C Bottino
Journal:  Int Mater Rev       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 15.750

4.  A hierarchical vascularized engineered bone inspired by intramembranous ossification for mandibular regeneration.

Authors:  Xin Ye; Jianxiang He; Shaolong Wang; Qianglong Han; Dongqi You; Bin Feng; Feiya Zhao; Jun Yin; Mengfei Yu; Huiming Wang; Huayong Yang
Journal:  Int J Oral Sci       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 24.897

Review 5.  [Research progress of in-situ three dimensional bio-printing technology for repairing bone and cartilage injuries].

Authors:  Zhiwei Pei; Jianzhong Wang
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2022-04-15

Review 6.  Nanoscale and Macroscale Scaffolds with Controlled-Release Polymeric Systems for Dental Craniomaxillofacial Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Saeed Ur Rahman; Malvika Nagrath; Sasikumar Ponnusamy; Praveen R Arany
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2018-08-20       Impact factor: 3.623

7.  3D Culture of Bone Marrow-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells (BMSCs) Could Improve Bone Regeneration in 3D-Printed Porous Ti6Al4V Scaffolds.

Authors:  Lingjia Yu; Yuanhao Wu; Jieying Liu; Bo Li; Bupeng Ma; Yaqian Li; Zhenfei Huang; Yu He; Hai Wang; Zhihong Wu; Guixing Qiu
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 5.443

Review 8.  The Impact of Bioceramic Scaffolds on Bone Regeneration in Preclinical In Vivo Studies: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Giulia Brunello; Sourav Panda; Lucia Schiavon; Stefano Sivolella; Lisa Biasetto; Massimo Del Fabbro
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 3.623

9.  Effect of strontium-containing on the properties of Mg-doped wollastonite bioceramic scaffolds.

Authors:  Su Wang; Linlin Liu; Xin Zhou; Danfeng Yang; Zhang'ao Shi; Yongqiang Hao
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 2.819

Review 10.  Biomaterials for In Situ Tissue Regeneration: A Review.

Authors:  Saba Abdulghani; Geoffrey R Mitchell
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2019-11-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.