2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.11.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Individual response variations in scaffold-guided bone regeneration are determined by independent strain- and injury-induced mechanisms

Abstract: This study explored the regenerative osteogenic response in the distal femur of sheep using scaffolds having stiffness values within, and above and below, the range of trabecular bone apparent modulus. Scaffolds 3D-printed from stiff titanium and compliant polyamide were implanted into a cylindrical metaphyseal defect 15 × 15 mm. After six weeks, bone ingrowth varied between 7 and 21% of the scaffold pore volume and this was generally inversely proportional to scaffold stiffness. The individual reparative resp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
58
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
5
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The implant modulus depends on pore size and strut thickness, whilst the amount of bone ingrowth depends on implant modulus and loading conditions. The reliance of bone ingrowth on the modulus of a porous material has been demonstrated, 8,24 and from this study it is apparent that modulus mismatch between the implant and the surrounding bone may lead to regions of the porous structure without bone tissue. The novelty of our study is that we predict bone ingrowth and relate this to the fatigue performance of substantially porous implants.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…The implant modulus depends on pore size and strut thickness, whilst the amount of bone ingrowth depends on implant modulus and loading conditions. The reliance of bone ingrowth on the modulus of a porous material has been demonstrated, 8,24 and from this study it is apparent that modulus mismatch between the implant and the surrounding bone may lead to regions of the porous structure without bone tissue. The novelty of our study is that we predict bone ingrowth and relate this to the fatigue performance of substantially porous implants.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…28 The defined structure, as a kind of mechanical cue, can influence cell behaviors and control some of their key features at the molecular and cellular levels. 7,12 When fabricating bone substitute scaffolds, we need to consider the impact of physical cues such as internal porosity, 7 pore structure, surface roughness, compressive moduli, 29 and the alignment of ECM and bone cells. 30 Various methods have been applied to prepare 3D porous biomaterial scaffolds as bone substitutes.…”
Section: Fabrication Of Three-dimensional Biomaterials Scaffolds For Bmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The developing field of bone engineering aims to take advantage of the innate repair capacity of this tissue (O'Brien, 2011), but the variability in the outcome of the products is one of the main limitations for their clinical translation. For example, the individual heterogeneous response in newly formed bone tissue formation leads to drastic changes in the scaffold design (Reznikov et al, 2019). In vitro models can explore the impact of individual response in tissue engineering products, but they require a bone cell source representing the phenotype variability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%