Cargando…
Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation
Pore parameters, structural stability, and filler morphology of artificial implants are key factors influencing the process of bone tissue repair. However, the extent to which each of these factors contributes to bone formation in the preparation of porous bioceramics is currently unclear, with the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10569306/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37840661 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1260639 |
_version_ | 1785119524705533952 |
---|---|
author | Yue, Xusong Zhao, Liben Yang, Jun Jiao, Xiaoyi Wu, Fanghui Zhang, Yan Li, Yifan Qiu, Jiandi Ke, Xiurong Sun, Xiaoliang Yang, Xianyan Gou, Zhongru Zhang, Lei Yang, Guojing |
author_facet | Yue, Xusong Zhao, Liben Yang, Jun Jiao, Xiaoyi Wu, Fanghui Zhang, Yan Li, Yifan Qiu, Jiandi Ke, Xiurong Sun, Xiaoliang Yang, Xianyan Gou, Zhongru Zhang, Lei Yang, Guojing |
author_sort | Yue, Xusong |
collection | PubMed |
description | Pore parameters, structural stability, and filler morphology of artificial implants are key factors influencing the process of bone tissue repair. However, the extent to which each of these factors contributes to bone formation in the preparation of porous bioceramics is currently unclear, with the two often being coupled. Herein, we prepared magnesium-doped wollastonite (Mg-CSi) scaffolds with 57% and 70% porosity (57-S and 70-S) via a 3D printing technique. Meanwhile, the bioceramic granules (57-G and 70-G) with curved pore topography (IWP) were prepared by physically disrupting the 57-S and 70-S scaffolds, respectively, and compared for in vivo osteogenesis at 4, 10, and 16 weeks. The pore parameters and the mechanical and biodegradable properties of different porous bioceramics were characterized systematically. The four groups of porous scaffolds and granules were then implanted into a rabbit femoral defect model to evaluate the osteogenic behavior in vivo. 2D/3D reconstruction and histological analysis showed that significant bone tissue production was visible in the central zone of porous granule groups at the early stage but bone tissue ingrowth was slower in the porous scaffold groups. The bone tissue regeneration and reconstruction capacity were stronger after 10 weeks, and the porous architecture of the 57-S scaffold was maintained stably at 16 weeks. These experimental results demonstrated that the structure-collapsed porous bioceramic is favorable for early-stage osteoconduction and that the 3D topological scaffolds may provide more structural stability for bone tissue growth for a long-term stage. These findings provide new ideas for the selection of different types of porous bioceramics for clinical bone repair. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10569306 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105693062023-10-13 Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation Yue, Xusong Zhao, Liben Yang, Jun Jiao, Xiaoyi Wu, Fanghui Zhang, Yan Li, Yifan Qiu, Jiandi Ke, Xiurong Sun, Xiaoliang Yang, Xianyan Gou, Zhongru Zhang, Lei Yang, Guojing Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Pore parameters, structural stability, and filler morphology of artificial implants are key factors influencing the process of bone tissue repair. However, the extent to which each of these factors contributes to bone formation in the preparation of porous bioceramics is currently unclear, with the two often being coupled. Herein, we prepared magnesium-doped wollastonite (Mg-CSi) scaffolds with 57% and 70% porosity (57-S and 70-S) via a 3D printing technique. Meanwhile, the bioceramic granules (57-G and 70-G) with curved pore topography (IWP) were prepared by physically disrupting the 57-S and 70-S scaffolds, respectively, and compared for in vivo osteogenesis at 4, 10, and 16 weeks. The pore parameters and the mechanical and biodegradable properties of different porous bioceramics were characterized systematically. The four groups of porous scaffolds and granules were then implanted into a rabbit femoral defect model to evaluate the osteogenic behavior in vivo. 2D/3D reconstruction and histological analysis showed that significant bone tissue production was visible in the central zone of porous granule groups at the early stage but bone tissue ingrowth was slower in the porous scaffold groups. The bone tissue regeneration and reconstruction capacity were stronger after 10 weeks, and the porous architecture of the 57-S scaffold was maintained stably at 16 weeks. These experimental results demonstrated that the structure-collapsed porous bioceramic is favorable for early-stage osteoconduction and that the 3D topological scaffolds may provide more structural stability for bone tissue growth for a long-term stage. These findings provide new ideas for the selection of different types of porous bioceramics for clinical bone repair. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10569306/ /pubmed/37840661 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1260639 Text en Copyright © 2023 Yue, Zhao, Yang, Jiao, Wu, Zhang, Li, Qiu, Ke, Sun, Yang, Gou, Zhang and Yang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Bioengineering and Biotechnology Yue, Xusong Zhao, Liben Yang, Jun Jiao, Xiaoyi Wu, Fanghui Zhang, Yan Li, Yifan Qiu, Jiandi Ke, Xiurong Sun, Xiaoliang Yang, Xianyan Gou, Zhongru Zhang, Lei Yang, Guojing Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title | Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title_full | Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title_short | Comparison of osteogenic capability of 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
title_sort | comparison of osteogenic capability of 3d-printed bioceramic scaffolds and granules with different porosities for clinical translation |
topic | Bioengineering and Biotechnology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10569306/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37840661 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1260639 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yuexusong comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT zhaoliben comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT yangjun comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT jiaoxiaoyi comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT wufanghui comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT zhangyan comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT liyifan comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT qiujiandi comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT kexiurong comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT sunxiaoliang comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT yangxianyan comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT gouzhongru comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT zhanglei comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation AT yangguojing comparisonofosteogeniccapabilityof3dprintedbioceramicscaffoldsandgranuleswithdifferentporositiesforclinicaltranslation |