| Literature DB >> 33195122 |
Megan E Cooke1,2, Jose L Ramirez-GarciaLuna2,3, Karla Rangel-Berridi2,3, Hyeree Park4, Showan N Nazhat4, Michael H Weber1,2, Janet E Henderson2,3, Derek H Rosenzweig1,3.
Abstract
Critical-size bone defects are those that will not heal without intervention and can arise secondary to trauma, infection, and surgical resection of tumors. Treatment options are currently limited to filling the defect with autologous bone, of which there is not always an abundant supply, or ceramic pastes that only allow for limited osteo-inductive and -conductive capacity. In this study we investigate the repair of bone defects using a 3D printed LayFomm scaffold. LayFomm is a polymer blend of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and polyurethane (PU). It can be printed using the most common method of 3D printing, fused deposition modeling, before being washed in water-based solutions to remove the PVA. This leaves a more compliant, micro-porous PU elastomer. In vitro analysis of dental pulp stem cells seeded onto macro-porous scaffolds showed their ability to adhere, proliferate and form mineralized matrix on the scaffold in the presence of osteogenic media. Subcutaneous implantation of LayFomm in a rat model showed the formation of a vascularized fibrous capsule, but without a chronic inflammatory response. Implantation into a mandibular defect showed significantly increased mineralized tissue production when compared to a currently approved bone putty. While their mechanical properties are insufficient for use in load-bearing defects, these findings are promising for the use of polyurethane scaffolds in craniofacial bone regeneration.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; bone regeneration; fused depositing modeling (FDM); layfomm; mandibular defect; polyurethane
Year: 2020 PMID: 33195122 PMCID: PMC7644785 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.557215
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
Figure 1(A) Temporal change in scaffold weight with removal of PVA by washing in dH2O (N = 4). Mechanical compression data of washed and unwashed scaffolds showing (B) deformation behavior and (C) compressive modulus between 8 and 10% strain (N = 5). SEM images of (D) washed and (E) unwashed LayFomm scaffolds, showing the appearance of micropores (arrowheads) following removal of PVA by washing in dH2O. Error bars (A,C) and fill between lines (B) indicates standard deviation. For (A), lines are as follows: wet—smoothing spline, 7 knots; dry and Δ weight—non-linear fit, R2 = 0.9907 and 0.9892, respectively. ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 2Live/Dead staining (A,E) showing good viability of DPSCs on the scaffolds. SEM images of DPSC-seeded scaffolds after 21 days of culture in either control (A–D) or osteogenic (E–H) media showing cells and matrix filling the macropores of the scaffolds.
Figure 3Histology of DPSCs cultured on LayFomm scaffolds in either control or osteogenic media for 21 days. Safranin-O/Fast green staining indicates formation of collagenous matrix in both conditions; Von Kossa staining for phosphate, arrows indicate phosphate-rich nodules formed in osteogenic media; Alizarin Red staining for calcium shows increased straining in osteogenic media.
Figure 4Histological evaluation of subcutaneous implantation of LayFomm scaffold. (A–C) H&E staining of overall tissue morphology; (D–F) α-smooth muscle actin shows formation of fibrous tissue around and directly next to (*) the implanted scaffold; (G–I) CD34 shows positive staining for haematopoietic stem cells, indicating vascularization (arrowheads); (J–L) CD86 staining shows few clusters of M1 macrophages at the scaffold-tissue interface (arrows); (M–O) Arg-1 staining for M2 macrophages is negative.
Figure 5MicroCT reconstruction of rat mandible pre (A) and post (B) implantation of LayFomm scaffold; LayFomm is radio-translucent so not visible. (C) Toluidine Blue staining of the scaffold following implantation. *Implant region and #bone interface region in (D–K). ALP (D–G) and TRAP (H–K) staining of repaired tissue and the bone interface following 6 weeks of either Norian putty or LayFomm implantation. Scale bar = 50 μm.
Figure 6MicroCT reconstructions of implanted scaffolds compared to Norian CRS putty. The white box marks the analyzed ROI that corresponds to data in Table 1. Dashed red lines represent the corresponding transaxial and sagittal views.
Bone volume (BV), Bone volume/Tissue volume (BV/TV), numbers of trabeculae (Tb.N), trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular separation (Tb.Sp), Total porosity (Po.Tot), Connective Density (Conn.Dn), Structure Model Index (SMI).
| BV/TV (%) | 14.33 ± 7.94 | 30.26 ± 9.46 | 0.02 |
| Tb.Th (μm) | 140.5 ± 14.3 | 201.7 ± 33.4 | <0.001 |
| Tb.Sp (μm) | 1456.0 ± 226.9 | 685.5 ± 113.3 | <0.001 |
| Tb.N (no./mm) | 1.66 ± 0.65 | 1.58 ± 0.58 | 0.69 |
| Po(Tot) (%) | 76.92 ± 8.56 | 69.74 ± 9.46 | 0.16 |
| Conn.Dn (1/μm) | 0.09 ± 0.06 | 0.11 ± 0.04 | 0.55 |
| SMI | −3.92 ± 1.18 | −0.30 ± 1.68 | <0.001 |
Data was analyzed using paired t-tests (n = 6 rats).