journal article·2017-11

Effect of the drying process on the compressive strength and cell proliferation of hydroxyapatite‐derived scaffolds

Francisco Martínez‐Vázquez, Antonia Pajares, Pedro Miranda

Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract The compressive strength and MC3T3 cell proliferation response of robocast hydroxyapatite‐derived scaffolds was evaluated for samples fabricated by conventional and freeze‐drying methods followed by sintering at 1100 or 1300°C. Both the sintering temperature and, especially, the drying method affected significantly the size and morphology of the residual microporosity within the robocast scaffold's struts. The freeze‐drying method generated a persistent large (1‐10 μm) microporosity of dendritic morphology that was found to improve the biological response of hydroxyapatite‐derived scaffolds. Conversely, conventional drying enhances the compressive strength of the structures. Strength was also increased at the higher sintering temperature, although at the expense of a poorer cell proliferation behavior. The results of this study suggest that the use of a freeze drying process after printing by robocasting provides a very appropriate method for enhancing the biological performance and reliability of bioceramic robocast scaffolds without severely reducing their compressive strength. And, thus, shows promise as an effective method to optimize the performance of robocast scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Dental materials and restorations

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Departamento de Ingeniería Mecánica Energética y de los Materiales Universidad de Extremadura Badajoz Spain

Funding

Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad

References (24)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/jbm.82029011310.1002/jbm.820290113 ↗
2. 10.1111/j.1525-1594.1997.tb00514.x10.1111/j.1525-1594.1997.tb00514.x ↗
3. 10.1023/A:101855881687110.1023/A:1018558816871 ↗
4. 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80139-110.1016/S0099-2399(06)80139-1 ↗
5. 10.1089/ten.teb.2012.043710.1089/ten.teb.2012.0437 ↗
6. 10.1002/jbm.a.3460910.1002/jbm.a.34609 ↗
7. 10.1002/jbm.a.3158710.1002/jbm.a.31587 ↗
8. 10.1002/jbm.b.3293510.1002/jbm.b.32935 ↗
9. 10.1002/jbm.a.3465710.1002/jbm.a.34657 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2013.08.00310.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2013.08.003 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.05210.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.052 ↗
12. 10.1023/A:100891360985710.1023/A:1008913609857 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.06.02810.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.06.028 ↗
14. 10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00036-810.1016/S0142-9612(99)00036-8 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.actbio.2010.05.02410.1016/j.actbio.2010.05.024 ↗
16. 10.1098/rsif.2012.006810.1098/rsif.2012.0068 ↗
17. 10.1023/A:100890561318210.1023/A:1008905613182 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.msec.2012.09.01910.1016/j.msec.2012.09.019 ↗
19. 10.2147/nano.2006.1.2.18910.2147/nano.2006.1.2.189 ↗
20. 10.1007/s10856-007-3347-410.1007/s10856-007-3347-4 ↗
21. 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00075-210.1016/S0142-9612(00)00075-2 ↗
22. 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00174-510.1016/S0142-9612(00)00174-5 ↗
23. 10.1016/S0109-5641(97)80010-310.1016/S0109-5641(97)80010-3 ↗
24. 10.1016/0142-9612(94)90246-110.1016/0142-9612(94)90246-1 ↗