Synthetic bone: Design by additive manufacturing

Barba, Daniel; Alabort, Enrique; Reed, Roger C.

doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2019.07.049

Cited by 225 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many reports have been published concerning 3DPPT [ 6 , 9 , 12 , 14 , 25 ], and reviews have revealed the difficulty of decision making based on the interpretation of this information [ 26 – 28 ]. Publications attempting to provide an overview almost always rely on either a biomimetic approach (3DPPT printed so that the lattice provides an optimized mechanical and biological match to bone tissue) or optimal printability/producibility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Additively manufactured titanium scaffolds and osteointegration - meta-analyses and moderator-analyses of in vivo biomechanical testing

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Maximizing osteointegration potential of three-dimensionally-printed porous titanium (3DPPT) is an ongoing focus in biomaterial research. Many strategies are proposed and tested but there is no weighted comparison of results. Methods We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase to obtain two pools of 3DPPT studies that performed mechanical implant-removal testing in animal models and whose characteristics were sufficiently similar to compare the outcomes in meta-analyses (MAs). We expanded these MAs to multivariable meta-regressions (moderator analysis) to verify whether statistical models including reported scaffold features (e.g., “pore-size”, “porosity”, “type of unit cell”) or post-printing treatments (e.g., surface treatments, adding agents) could explain the observed differences in treatment effects (expressed as shear strength of bone-titanium interface). Results “Animal type” (species of animal in which the 3DPPT was implanted) and “type of post-treatment” (treatment performed after 3D printing) were moderators providing statistically significant models for differences in mechanical removal strength. An interaction model with covariables “pore-size” and “porosity” in a rabbit subgroup analysis (the most reported animal model) was also significant. Impact of other moderators (including “time” and “location of implant”) was not statistically significant. Discussion/conclusion Our findings suggest a stronger effect from porosity in a rat than in a sheep model. Additionally, adding a calcium-containing layer does not improve removal strength but the other post-treatments do. Our results provide overview and new insights, but little narrowing of existing value ranges. Consequent reporting of 3DPPT characteristics, standardized comparison, and expression of porosity in terms of surface roughness could help tackle these existing dilemmas. Graphical abstract

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Additively manufactured titanium scaffolds and osteointegration - meta-analyses and moderator-analyses of in vivo biomechanical testing

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In research, the manufacturability, mechanical properties, and bone ingrowth of four kinds of skeleton-TPMS were compared. The results illustrated that Gyroid skeletal-TPMS had the most flexible design space, that is, it performed well in three aspects (Barba et al, 2019). However, the compressive strength of sheet-TPMS was 1.3-2 times that of skeleton TPMS, and its toughness was also higher (Cai et al, 2019).…”

Section: Tpmsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Porous Scaffold Design for Additive Manufacturing in Orthopedics: A Review

Chen

Han

Wang

et al. 2020

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

150

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing application of orthopedic scaffolds, a dramatically increasing number of requirements for scaffolds are precise. The porous structure has been a fundamental design in the bone tissue engineering or orthopedic clinics because of its low Young's modulus, high compressive strength, and abundant cell accommodation space. The porous structure manufactured by additive manufacturing (AM) technology has controllable pore size, pore shape, and porosity. The single unit can be designed and arrayed with AM, which brings controllable pore characteristics and mechanical properties. This paper presents the current status of porous designs in AM technology. The porous structures are stated from the cellular structure and the whole structure. In the aspect of the cellular structure, non-parametric design and parametric design are discussed here according to whether the algorithm generates the structure or not. The non-parametric design comprises the diamond, the body-centered cubic, and the polyhedral structure, etc. The Voronoi, the Triply Periodic Minimal Surface, and other parametric designs are mainly discussed in parametric design. In the discussion of cellular structures, we emphasize the design, and the resulting biomechanical and biological effects caused by designs. In the aspect of the whole structure, the recent experimental researches are reviewed on uniform design, layered gradient design, and layered gradient design based on topological optimization, etc. These parts are summarized because of the development of technology and the demand for mechanics or bone growth. Finally, the challenges faced by the porous designs and prospects of porous structure in orthopedics are proposed in this paper.

show abstract

“…Therefore, there is a lack of research on the skeletal TPMS structure. In research conducted by Barba et al, they found that the Gyroid skeletal TPMS shows a feasible design of a scaffold, which is superior in terms of manufacturability, mechanical properties and bone ingrowth [ 74 ]. However, Cai et al stated that the compressive strength of the skeletal TPMS is much lower as compared to the sheet TPMS [ 75 ].…”

Section: Computational Methods In Designing a Scaffoldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Computational Method in Designing a Unit Cell of Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffold: A Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design of a scaffold of bone tissue engineering plays an important role in ensuring cell viability and cell growth. Therefore, it is a necessity to produce an ideal scaffold by predicting and simulating the properties of the scaffold. Hence, the computational method should be adopted since it has a huge potential to be used in the implementation of the scaffold of bone tissue engineering. To explore the field of computational method in the area of bone tissue engineering, this paper provides an overview of the usage of a computational method in designing a unit cell of bone tissue engineering scaffold. In order to design a unit cell of the scaffold, we discussed two categories of unit cells that can be used to design a feasible scaffold, which are non-parametric and parametric designs. These designs were later described and being categorised into multiple types according to their characteristics, such as circular structures and Triply Periodic Minimal Surface (TPMS) structures. The advantages and disadvantages of these designs were discussed. Moreover, this paper also represents some software that was used in simulating and designing the bone tissue scaffold. The challenges and future work recommendations had also been included in this paper.

show abstract

Synthetic bone: Design by additive manufacturing

Cited by 225 publications

References 64 publications

Additively manufactured titanium scaffolds and osteointegration - meta-analyses and moderator-analyses of in vivo biomechanical testing

Additively manufactured titanium scaffolds and osteointegration - meta-analyses and moderator-analyses of in vivo biomechanical testing

Porous Scaffold Design for Additive Manufacturing in Orthopedics: A Review

Application of Computational Method in Designing a Unit Cell of Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffold: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About