Regenerative medicine approaches for massive craniomaxillofacial (CMF) bone defects face challenges associated with the scale of missing bone, the need for rapid graft-defect integration, and challenges related to inflammation and infection. Mineralized collagen scaffolds have been shown to promote mesenchymal stem cell osteogenesis due to their porous nature and material properties, but are mechanically weak, limiting surgical practicality. Previously, these scaffolds were combined with 3D-printed polycaprolactone (PCL) mesh to form a scaffold-mesh composite to increase strength and promote bone formation in sub-critical sized porcine ramus defects. Here, we compare the performance of mineralized collagen–PCL composites to the PCL mesh in a critical-sized porcine ramus defect model. While there were no differences in overall healing response between groups, our data demonstrated broadly variable metrics of healing regarding new bone infiltration and fibrous tissue formation. Abscesses were present surrounding some implants and PCL polymer was still present after 9–10 months of implantation. Overall, while there was limited successful healing, with 2 of 22 implants showed substantial levels of bone regeneration, and others demonstrating some form of new bone formation, the results suggest targeted improvements to improve repair of large animal models to more accurately represent CMF bone healing. Notably, strategies to increase osteogenesis throughout the implant, modulate the immune system to support repair, and employ shape-fitting tactics to avoid implant micromotion and resultant fibrosis. Improvements to the mineralized collagen scaffolds involve changes in pore size and shape to increase cell migration and osteogenesis and inclusion or delivery of factors to aid vascular ingrowth and bone regeneration.
Objectives/Hypothesis To analyze the use of highly translatable three‐dimensional (3D)–printed auricular scaffolds with and without novel cartilage tissue inserts in a rodent model. Study Design Preclinical rodent animal model. Methods This prospective study assessed a single‐stage 3D‐printed auricular bioscaffold with or without porcine cartilage tissue inserts in an athymic rodent model. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine computed tomography images of a human auricle were segmented to create an external anatomic envelope filled with orthogonally interconnected spherical pores. Scaffolds with and without tissue inset sites were 3D printed by laser sintering bioresorbable polycaprolactone, then implanted subcutaneously in five rats for each group. Results Ten athymic rats were studied to a goal of 24 weeks postoperatively. Precise anatomic similarity and scaffold integrity were maintained in both scaffold conditions throughout experimentation with grossly visible tissue ingrowth and angiogenesis upon explantation. Cartilage‐seeded scaffolds had relatively lower rates of nonsurgical site complications compared to unseeded scaffolds with relatively increased surgical site ulceration, though neither met statistical significance. Histology revealed robust soft tissue infiltration and vascularization in both seeded and unseeded scaffolds, and demonstrated impressive maintenance of viable cartilage in cartilage‐seeded scaffolds. Radiology confirmed soft tissue infiltration in all scaffolds, and biomechanical modeling suggested amelioration of stress in scaffolds implanted with cartilage. Conclusions A hybrid approach incorporating cartilage insets into 3D‐printed bioscaffolds suggests enhanced clinical and histological outcomes. These data demonstrate the potential to integrate point‐of‐care tissue engineering techniques into 3D printing to generate alternatives to current reconstructive surgery techniques and avoid the demands of traditional tissue engineering. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 131:1008–1015, 2021
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.