3D printed poly(lactic acid)-based nanocomposite scaffolds with bioactive coatings for tissue engineering applications
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In this work, the effect of two different types of bioactive coatings on the properties of 3D printed poly(lactic acid)/montmorillonite (PLA/MMT) nanocomposite scaffolds was examined. To improve their suitability for bone tissue engineering applications, the PLA nanocomposite scaffolds were coated with (i) ordered mesoporous Strontium bioglass (SrBG) and (ii) SrBG and nanohydroxyapatite (nHA) using a simple dip coating procedure. The effect of the coatings on the morphology, chemical structure, wettability and nanomechanical properties of the scaffolds was examined. The hydrophilicity of PLA nanocomposite scaffolds increased after the SrBG coating and increased even more with the SrBG/nHA coating. Moreover, in the case of PLA/MMT/SrBG/nHA 3D printed scaffolds, the elastic modulus increased by ~ 80% and the hardness increased from 156.9 ± 6.4 to 293.6 ± 11.3 MPa in comparison with PLA. Finally, the in vitro biocompatibility and osteogenic potential were evaluated using bone marrow-derived stem cells. The coating process was found to be a fast, economical and effective way to improve the biomineralization and promote the differentiation of the stem cells toward osteoblasts, in comparison with the neat PLA and the PLA/MMT nanocomposite scaffold. Graphical abstract
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties · Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (91)
Show source-provided references
1. Kim T, See CW, Li X, Zhu D (2020) Orthopedic implants and devices for bone fractures and defects: past. Present Perspect Eng Regen 1:6–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engreg.2020.05.00310.1016/j.engreg.2020.05.003 ↗
2. Pierantozzi D, Scalzone A, Jindal S, Stīpniece L, Šalma-Ancāne K, Dalgarno K, Gentile P, Mancuso E (2020) 3D Printed Sr-containing composite scaffolds: effect of structural design and material formulation towards new strategies for bone tissue engineering. Compos Sci Technol, 191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.10806910.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108069 ↗
3. Mikael PE, Golebiowska AA, Xin X, Rowe DW, Nukavarapu SP (2020) Evaluation of an engineered hybrid matrix for bone regeneration via endochondral ossification. Ann Biomed Eng 48:992–1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02279-010.1007/s10439-019-02279-0 ↗
4. Jammalamadaka U, Tappa K (2018) Recent advances in biomaterials for 3D printing and tissue engineering. J Funct Biomater 910.3390/jfb9010022 ↗
5. Li X, Wang L, Fan Y, Feng Q, Cui FZ, Watari F (2013) Nanostructured scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A 101(A):2424–243510.1002/jbm.a.34539 ↗
6. Babilotte J, Guduric V, le Nihouannen D, Naveau A, Fricain JC, Catros S (2019) 3D printed polymer-mineral composite biomaterials for bone tissue engineering: fabrication and characterization. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 107:2579–2595. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.3434810.1002/jbm.b.34348 ↗
7. Qu H (2020) Additive Manufacturing for Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds. Mater Today Commun, 24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.10102410.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101024 ↗
8. Moreno Madrid AP, Vrech SM, Sanchez MA, Rodriguez AP (2019) Advances in additive manufacturing for bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng, C 100:631–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.03.03710.1016/j.msec.2019.03.037 ↗
9. Nazeer MA, Onder OC, Sevgili I, Yilgor E, Kavakli IH, Yilgor I (2020) 3D printed poly(lactic acid) scaffolds modified with chitosan and hydroxyapatite for bone repair applications. Mater Today Commun 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101515.10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101515 ↗
10. Liu J, Mohd Rafiq NB,; Wong LM, Wang, S (2021) Surface treatment and bioinspired coating for 3D-printed implants. Front Chem, 910.3389/fchem.2021.768007 ↗
11. Mohd Pu’ad NAS, Abdul Haq RH, Mohd Noh H, Abdullah HZ, Idris MI, Lee TC (2019) Review on the fabrication of fused deposition modelling (FDM) composite filament for biomedical applications. In: Proceedings of the materials today: proceedings. Elsevier Ltd,; 29:228–23210.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.535 ↗
12. Bai T, Zhu B, Liu H, Wang Y, Song G, Liu C, Shen C (2020) Biodegradable poly(lactic acid) nanocomposites reinforced and toughened by carbon nanotubes/clay hybrids. Int J Biol Macromol 151:628–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.02.20910.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.02.209 ↗
13. Terzopoulou Z, Zamboulis A, Koumentakou I, Michailidou G, Jan Noordam M, Bikiaris DN (2022) Biocompatible synthetic polymers for tissue engineering purposes. Biomacromolecules 23:1841–1863. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.2c0004710.1021/acs.biomac.2c00047 ↗
14. Sahmani S, Khandan A, Esmaeili S, Saber-Samandari S, Ghadiri Nejad M, Aghdam MM (2020) Calcium phosphate-PLA scaffolds fabricated by fused deposition modeling technique for bone tissue applications: fabrication. Char Simul Ceram Int 46:2447–2456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.23810.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.238 ↗
15. Chen X, Gao C, Jiang J, Wu Y, Zhu P, Chen G (2019) 3D printed porous PLA/NHA composite scaffolds with enhanced osteogenesis and osteoconductivityin vivo for bone regeneration. Biomed Mater (Bristol), 14. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/ab388d10.1088/1748-605X/ab388d ↗
16. Diez-Escudero A, Harlin H, Isaksson P, Persson C (2020) porous polylactic acid scaffolds for bone regeneration: a study of additively manufactured triply periodic minimal surfaces and their osteogenic potential. J Tissue Eng, 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/204173142095654110.1177/2041731420956541 ↗
17. Valiño-Cultelli V, Varela-López Ó, González-Cantalapiedra A (2021) Preliminary clinical and radiographic evaluation of a novel resorbable implant of polylactic acid (Pla) for tibial tuberosity advancement (Tta) by modified maquet technique (Mmt). Animals, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani1105127110.3390/ani11051271 ↗
18. Sanyang ML, Jawaid M (2019) Bio-based polymers and nanocomposites: preparation, processing, properties and performance. Springer International Publishing. ISBN 9783030058258.10.1007/978-3-030-05825-8 ↗
19. Tajbakhsh S, Hajiali F (2017) A comprehensive study on the fabrication and properties of biocomposites of poly(lactic acid)/ceramics for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C 70:897–91210.1016/j.msec.2016.09.008 ↗
20. Corcione CE, Gervaso F, Scalera F, Montagna F, Maiullaro T, Sannino A, Maffezzoli A (2017) 3D printing of hydroxyapatite polymer-based composites for bone tissue engineering. J Polym Eng 37:741–746. https://doi.org/10.1515/polyeng-2016-019410.1515/polyeng-2016-0194 ↗
21. Yang WF, Long L, Wang R, Chen D, Duan S, Xu FJ (2018) Surface-modified hydroxyapatite nanoparticle-reinforced polylactides for three-dimensional printed bone tissue engineering scaffolds. J Biomed Nanotechnol 14:295–303. https://doi.org/10.1166/jbn.2018.249510.1166/jbn.2018.2495 ↗
22. Nilawar S, Uddin M, Chatterjee K (2021) Surface engineering of biodegradable implants: emerging trends in bioactive ceramic coatings and mechanical treatments. Mater Adv 2:7820–784110.1039/D1MA00733E ↗
23. Chen W, Nichols L, Teer L, Clinton K, Priddy LB (2022) A hybrid coating of polydopamine and nano-hydroxyapatite enhances surface properties of 3d printed poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) scaffolds. J Mater Sci 57:13011–13026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-022-07442-y10.1007/s10853-022-07442-y ↗
24. Zhang J, Tong D, Song H, Ruan R, Sun Y, Lin Y, Wang J, Hou L, Dai J, Ding J et al (2022) Osteoimmunity-regulating biomimetically hierarchical scaffold for augmented bone regeneration. Adv Mater. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20220204410.1002/adma.202202044 ↗
25. Gunputh U, Le H (2017) Composite coatings for implants and tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomed Comp, pp 111–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100752-5.00006-810.1016/B978-0-08-100752-5.00006-8 ↗
26. Cun X, Hosta-Rigau L (2020) Topography: a biophysical approach to direct the fate of mesenchymal stem cells in tissue engineering applications. Nanomaterials 10:1–4110.3390/nano10102070 ↗
27. Liu F, Xu J, Wu L, Zheng T, Han Q, Liang Y, Zhang L, Li G, Yang Y (2021) The influence of the surface topographical cues of biomaterials on nerve cells in peripheral nerve regeneration: a review. Stem Cells Int10.1155/2021/8124444 ↗
28. Kaniuk Ł, Krysiak ZJ, Metwally S, Stachewicz U (2020) Osteoblasts and fibroblasts attachment to poly(3-hydroxybutyric acid-co-3-hydrovaleric acid) (phbv) film and electrospun scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C, 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.11066810.1016/j.msec.2020.110668 ↗
29. Backes EH, Fernandes EM, Diogo GS, Marques CF, Silva TH, Costa LC, Passador FR, Reis RL, Pessan LA (2021) Engineering 3D printed bioactive composite scaffolds based on the combination of aliphatic polyester and calcium phosphates for bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C 122:111928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2021.11192810.1016/j.msec.2021.111928 ↗
30. Esposito Corcione C, Gervaso F, Scalera F, Padmanabhan SK, Madaghiele M, Montagna F, Sannino A, Licciulli A, Maffezzoli A (2019) Highly loaded hydroxyapatite microsphere/ PLA porous scaffolds obtained by fused deposition modelling. Ceram Int 45:2803–2810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.07.29710.1016/j.ceramint.2018.07.297 ↗
31. Zhang B, Wang L, Song P, Pei X, Sun H, Wu L, Zhou C, Wang K, Fan Y, Zhang X (2021) 3D Printed bone tissue regenerative PLA/HA scaffolds with comprehensive performance optimizations. Mater Des, 201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.10949010.1016/j.matdes.2021.109490 ↗
32. Mondal S, Nguyen TP, Pham VH, Hoang G, Manivasagan P, Kim MH, Nam SY, Oh J (2020) Hydroxyapatite nano bioceramics optimized 3D printed poly lactic acid scaffold for bone tissue engineering application. Ceram Int 46:3443–3455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.10.05710.1016/j.ceramint.2019.10.057 ↗
33. Prakash C, Singh G, Singh S, Linda WL, Zheng HY, Ramakrishna S, Narayan R (2021) Mechanical reliability and in vitro bioactivity of 3D-printed porous polylactic acid-hydroxyapatite scaffold. J Mater Eng Perform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-021-05566-x10.1007/s11665-021-05566-x ↗
34. Dubinenko G, Zinoviev A, Bolbasov E, Kozelskaya A, Shesterikov E, Novikov V, Tverdokhlebov S () Highly filled poly(l-lactic acid)/hydroxyapatite composite for 3D printing of personalized bone tissue engineering scaffolds. J Appl Polym Sci, 138. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.4966210.1002/app.49662 ↗
35. Radulescu DE, Neacsu IA, Grumezescu AM, Andronescu E (2022) Novel trends into the development of natural hydroxyapatite-based polymeric composites for bone tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel), 1410.3390/polym14050899 ↗
36. Grigora M-E, Terzopoulou Z, Tsongas K, Bikiaris DN, Tzetzis D (2022) Physicochemical characterization and finite element analysis-assisted mechanical behavior of polylactic acid-montmorillonite 3D printed nanocomposites. Nanomaterials 2022, 12:2641. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1215264110.3390/nano12152641 ↗
37. Lee YH, Lee JH, An IG, Kim C, Lee DS, Lee YK, Nam J (2005) Do electrospun dual-porosity structure and biodegradation morphology of montmorillonite reinforced PLLA nanocomposite scaffolds. Biomaterials 26:3165–3172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.08.01810.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.08.018 ↗
38. Lee JH, Park TG, Park HS, Lee DS, Lee YK, Yoon SC, Nam J (2003) Do thermal and mechanical characteristics of poly(l-lactic acid) nanocomposite scaffold. Biomaterials 24:2773–2778. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00080-210.1016/S0142-9612(03)00080-2 ↗
39. Koç Demir A, Elçin AE, Elçin YM (2018) Strontium-modified chitosan/montmorillonite composites as bone tissue engineering scaffold. Mater Sci Eng, C 89:8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.03.02110.1016/j.msec.2018.03.021 ↗
40. Olad A, Farshi Azhar F (2014) The synergetic effect of bioactive ceramic and nanoclay on the properties of chitosan-gelatin/nanohydroxyapatite-montmorillonite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Ceram Int 40:10061–10072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.04.01010.1016/j.ceramint.2014.04.010 ↗
41. Fredholm YC, Karpukhina N, Brauer DS, Jones JR, Law RV, Hill RG (2012) Influence of strontium for calcium substitution in bioactive glasses on degradation, ion release and apatite formation. J R Soc Interface 9:880–889. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2011.038710.1098/rsif.2011.0387 ↗
42. Ningsih HS, Liu YC, Chen JW, Chou YJ (2022) Effects of strontium dopants on the in vitro bioactivity and cytotoxicity of strontium-doped spray-dried bioactive glass microspheres. J Non Cryst Solids, 576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2021.12128410.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2021.121284 ↗
43. Terzopoulou Z, Baciu D, Gounari E, Steriotis T, Charalambopoulou G, Tzetzis D, Bikiaris D (2019) composite membranes of poly(ϵ-caprolactone) with bisphosphonate-loaded bioactive glasses for potential bone tissue engineering applications. Molecules, 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules2417306710.3390/molecules24173067 ↗
44. Alksne M, Kalvaityte M, Simoliunas E, Rinkunaite I, Gendviliene I, Locs J, Rutkunas V, Bukelskiene V (2020) In vitro comparison of 3D printed polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite and polylactic acid/bioglass composite scaffolds: insights into materials for bone regeneration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.10364110.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103641 ↗
45. Oryan A, Eslaminejad MB, Kamali A, Hosseini S, Sayahpour FA, Baharvand H (2018) Synergistic effect of strontium. Bioactive Glass Nano Hydroxyapatite Promotes Bone Regeneration Critical Sized Radial Bone Defects. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.3409410.1002/jbm.b.34094 ↗
46. Baciu D (2015) Synthesis and characterization of well-ordered mesoporous bioglass nanospheres for biomedical applications. In: National Hellenic Research Foundation, (ed), Proceedings of the 10th anniversary conference of the hellenic society for biomaterials: Athens, 26 Nov 2015
47. Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D (2005) Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 26:5474–549110.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002 ↗
48. van Bael S, Chai YC, Truscello S, Moesen M, Kerckhofs G, van Oosterwyck H, Kruth JP, Schrooten J (2012) The effect of pore geometry on the in vitro biological behavior of human periosteum-derived cells seeded on selective laser-melted Ti6Al4V bone scaffolds. Acta Biomater 8:2824–2834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2012.04.00110.1016/j.actbio.2012.04.001 ↗
49. Tang X, Qin Y, Xu X, Guo D, Ye W, Wu W, Li R (2019) Fabrication and in vitro evaluation of 3D printed porous polyetherimide scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/207613810.1155/2019/2076138 ↗
50. Abbasi N, Hamlet S, Love RM, Nguyen NT (2020) Porous scaffolds for bone regeneration. J Sci Adv Mater Devices 5:1–910.1016/j.jsamd.2020.01.007 ↗
51. Grigora ME, Terzopoulou Z, Tsongas K, Klonos P, Kalafatakis N, Bikiaris DN, Kyritsis A, Tzetzis D (2021) Influence of reactive chain extension on the properties of 3D printed poly(lactic acid) constructs. Polymers (Basel), 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1309138110.3390/polym13091381 ↗
52. Chen W, Nichols L, Brinkley F, Bohna K, Tian W, Priddy MW, Priddy LB (2021) Alkali treatment facilitates functional nano-hydroxyapatite coating of 3D printed polylactic acid scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C, 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.11168610.1016/j.msec.2020.111686 ↗
53. Kokubo T, Takadama H (2006) How useful is sbf in predicting in vivo bone bioactivity? Biomaterials 27:2907–2915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.01710.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.017 ↗
54. Gounari E, Daniilidis A, Tsagias N, Michopoulou ANNA, Kouzi K, Koliakos G (2019) Isolation of a novel embryonic stem cell cord blood–derived population with in vitro hematopoietic capacity in the presence of Wharton’s Jelly–derived mesenchymal stromal cells. Cytotherapy 21:246–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2018.11.00610.1016/j.jcyt.2018.11.006 ↗
55. Koliakou I, Gounari E, Nerantzaki M, Pavlidou E, Bikiaris D, Kaloyianni M, Koliakos G (2019) Differentiation capacity of monocyte-derived multipotential cells on nanocomposite poly(e-caprolactone)-based thin films. Tissue Eng Regen Med 16:161–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-019-00185-z10.1007/s13770-019-00185-z ↗
56. Terzopoulou Z, Baciu D, Gounari E, Steriotis T, Charalambopoulou G, Bikiaris D (2018) Biocompatible nanobioglass reinforced poly(ε-caprolactone) composites synthesized via in situ ring opening polymerization. Polymers (Basel), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1004038110.3390/polym10040381 ↗
57. Fujikura K, Karpukhina N, Kasuga T, Brauer DS, Hill RG, Law RV (2012) Influence of strontium substitution on structure and crystallisation of bioglass® 45S5. J Mater Chem 22:7395–7402. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2jm14674f10.1039/c2jm14674f ↗
58. Taherkhani S, Moztarzadeh F (2016) Influence of strontium on the structure and biological properties of sol–gel-derived mesoporous bioactive glass (MBG) powder. J Solgel Sci Technol 78:539–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-016-3995-210.1007/s10971-016-3995-2 ↗
59. Shahrabi S, Hesaraki S, Moemeni S, Khorami M (2011) structural discrepancies and in vitro nanoapatite formation ability of sol-gel derived glasses doped with different bone stimulator ions. Ceram Int 37:2737–2746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2011.04.02510.1016/j.ceramint.2011.04.025 ↗
60. Moghanian A, Nasiripour S, Koohfar A, Sajjadnejad M, Hosseini SM, Taherkhani M, Miri Z, Hosseini SH, Aminitabar M, Rashvand A (2021) Characterization, in vitro bioactivity and biological studies of sol-gel-derived TiO2 substituted 58S bioactive glass. Int J Appl Ceram Technol 18:1430–1441. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.1378210.1111/ijac.13782 ↗
61. Luz GM, Mano JF (2011) Preparation and characterization of bioactive glass nanoparticles prepared by sol-gel for biomedical applications. Nanotechnology, 22. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/22/49/49401410.1088/0957-4484/22/49/494014 ↗
62. Wang X, Zhang Y, Ma Y, Chen D, Yang H, Li M (2016) Selenium—containing mesoporous bioactive glass particles: physicochemical and drug delivery properties. Ceram Int 42:3609–3617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.11.02410.1016/j.ceramint.2015.11.024 ↗
63. Hsu FY, Weng RC, Lin HM, Lin YH, Lu MR, Yu JL, Hsu HW (2015) A biomimetic extracellular matrix composed of mesoporous bioactive glass as a bone graft material. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 212:56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2015.03.02710.1016/j.micromeso.2015.03.027 ↗
64. Szymczyk-Ziółkowska P, Łabowska MB, Detyna J, Michalak I, Gruber P (2020) A review of fabrication polymer scaffolds for biomedical applications using additive manufacturing techniques. Biocybern Biomed Eng 40:624–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.2020.01.01510.1016/j.bbe.2020.01.015 ↗
65. Fathi A, Kermani F, Behnamghader A, Banijamali S, Mozafari M, Baino F, Kargozar S (2021) Three-dimensionally printed polycaprolactone/multicomponent bioactive glass scaffolds for potential application in bone tissue engineering. Biomedical Glasses 6:57–69. https://doi.org/10.1515/bglass-2020-000610.1515/bglass-2020-0006 ↗
66. Distler T, Fournier N, Grünewald A, Polley C, Seitz H, Detsch R, Boccaccini, AR (2020) Polymer-bioactive glass composite filaments for 3D scaffold manufacturing by fused deposition modeling: fabrication and characterization. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.0055210.3389/fbioe.2020.00552 ↗
67. Sztorch B, Brząkalski D, Pakuła D, Frydrych M, Špitalský Z, Przekop RE (2022) Natural and synthetic polymer fillers for applications in 3D printing—FDM technology area. Solids 3:508–548. https://doi.org/10.3390/solids303003410.3390/solids3030034 ↗
68. Rajakaruna RADNV, Subeshan B, Asmatulu E (2022) Fabrication of hydrophobic PLA filaments for additive manufacturing. J Mater Sci 57:8987–9001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-022-07217-510.1007/s10853-022-07217-5 ↗
69. Schätzlein E, Kicker C, Söhling N, Ritz U, Neijhoft J, Henrich D, Frank J, Marzi I, Blaeser A (2022) 3D-printed PLA-bioglass scaffolds with controllable calcium release and MSC adhesion for bone tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1412238910.3390/polym14122389 ↗
70. Alksne M, Kalvaityte M, Simoliunas E, Rinkunaite I, Gendviliene I, Locs J, Rutkunas V, Bukelskiene V(2020) In vitro comparison of 3D printed polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite and polylactic acid/bioglass composite scaffolds: insights into materials for bone regeneration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 104:10364,. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMBBM.2020.10364110.1016/J.JMBBM.2020.103641 ↗
71. Wang C, Meng C, Zhang Z, Zhu Q (2022) 3D printing of polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite scaffolds for in situ bone repair. Ceram Int 48:7491–7499. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CERAMINT.2021.11.29310.1016/J.CERAMINT.2021.11.293 ↗
72. Larrañaga A, Sarasua JR (2013) Effect of bioactive glass particles on the thermal degradation behaviour of medical polyesters. Polym Degrad Stab 98:751–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2012.12.01510.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2012.12.015 ↗
73. Blaker JJ, Bismarck A, Boccaccini AR, Young AM, Nazhat SN (2010) Premature degradation of poly(α-hydroxyesters) during thermal processing of bioglass®-containing composites. Acta Biomater 6:756–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2009.08.02010.1016/j.actbio.2009.08.020 ↗
74. Puppi D, Chiellini F, Piras AM, Chiellini E (2010) Polymeric materials for bone and cartilage repair. Progress in Polymer Science (Oxford) 35:403–44010.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.01.006 ↗
75. Liu C, Chan KW, Shen J, Liao CZ, Yeung KWK, Tjong SC (2016) Polyetheretherketone hybrid composites with bioactive nanohydroxyapatite and multiwalled carbon nanotube fillers. Polymers (Basel), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym812042510.3390/polym8120425 ↗
76. Sattary M, Rafienia M, Kazemi M, Salehi H, Mahmoudzadeh M (2019) Promoting effect of nano hydroxyapatite and vitamin D3 on the osteogenic differentiation of human adipose-derived stem cells in polycaprolactone/gelatin scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng, C 97:141–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.12.03010.1016/j.msec.2018.12.030 ↗
77. Pharr GM (1992) An improved technique for determining hardness and elastic modulus using load and displacement sensing indentation experiments. J Mater Res 7:1564–1583. https://doi.org/10.1557/JMR.1992.156410.1557/JMR.1992.1564 ↗
78. Mansour G, Zoumaki M, Tsongas K, Tzetzis D (2021) Microstructural and finite element analysis—assisted nanomechanical characterization of maize starch nanocomposite films. Mater Res, 24. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5373-MR-2020-040910.1590/1980-5373-MR-2020-0409 ↗
79. Kourtidou D, Tsongas K, Grigora ME, Tzetzis D, Bikiaris DN, Chrissafis K (2021) On the improved mechanical properties of ball-milled gnps reinforced short chain branched-polyethylene nanocomposite: micromechanical modeling and fractography study. Appl Sci (Switzerland), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1120942010.3390/app11209420 ↗
80. Tsongas K, Tzetzis D, Karantzalis A, Banias G, Exarchos D, Ahmadkhaniha D, Zanella C, Matikas T, Bochtis D (2019) Microstructural, surface topology and nanomechanical characterization of electrodeposited Ni-P/SiC nanocomposite coatings. Appl Sci (Switzerland), 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/app914290110.3390/app9142901 ↗
81. Kourtidou D, Grigora M-E, Tzetzis D, Bikiaris DN, Chrissafis K (2022) Graphene nanoplatelets’ effect on the crystallization, glass transition, and nanomechanical behavior of poly(ethylene 2,5-furandicarboxylate) nanocomposites. Molecules 27:6653. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules2719665310.3390/molecules27196653 ↗
82. Petretta M, Gambardella A, Boi M, Berni M, Cavallo C, Marchiori G, Maltarello MC, Bellucci D, Fini M, Baldini N et al. (2021) Composite scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration based on Pcl and Mg-containing bioactive glasses. Biology (Basel), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology1005039810.3390/biology10050398 ↗
83. Graphite Coatings for Biomedical Implants_ A Focus on Anti-Thrombosis and Corrosion Resistance Properties _ Elsevier Enhanced Reader.
84. Saini M (2015) Implant biomaterials: a comprehensive review. World J Clin Cases 3:52. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v3.i1.5210.12998/wjcc.v3.i1.52 ↗
85. Kumar M, Kumar R, Kumar S (2021) Synergistic effect of carbon nanotubes and nano-hydroxyapatite on mechanical properties of polyetheretherketone based hybrid nanocomposites. Polym Polym Compos 29:1365–1376. https://doi.org/10.1177/096739112096950310.1177/0967391120969503 ↗
86. Saberi A, Behnamghader A, Aghabarari B, Yousefi A, Majda D, Huerta MVM, Mozafari M (2022) 3D direct printing of composite bone scaffolds containing polylactic acid and spray dried mesoporous bioactive glass-ceramic microparticles. Int J Biol Macromol 207:9–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJBIOMAC.2022.02.06710.1016/J.IJBIOMAC.2022.02.067 ↗
87. Dieudonn SC, van den Dolder J, de Ruijter JE, Paldan H, Peltola T, van ’t Hof MA, Happonen RP, Jansen JA. (2002) Osteoblast differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells cultured on silica gel and sol-gel-derived titania, 2310.1016/S0142-9612(02)00068-6 ↗
88. Fazeli N, Arefian E, Irani S, Ardeshirylajimi A, Seyedjafari E (2021) 3D-printed PCL scaffolds coated with nanobioceramics enhance osteogenic differentiation of stem cells. ACS Omega 6:35284–35296. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c0401510.1021/acsomega.1c04015 ↗
89. Bernardo MP, da Silva BCR, Hamouda AEI, de Toledo MAS, Schalla C, Rütten, S, Goetzke, R, Mattoso LHC, Zenke M, Sechi A (2022) PLA/hydroxyapatite scaffolds exhibit in vitro immunological inertness and promote robust osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells without osteogenic stimuli. Sci Rep, 12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05207-w10.1038/s41598-022-05207-w ↗
90. Wang YW, Wu Q, Chen GQ (2004) Attachment, Proliferation and Differentiation of Osteoblasts on Random Biopolyester Poly(3-Hydroxybutyrate-Co-3-Hydroxyhexanoate) Scaffolds. Biomaterials 25:669–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00561-110.1016/S0142-9612(03)00561-1 ↗
91. Lin X, Patil S, Gao YG, Qian A (2020) The bone extracellular matrix in bone formation and regeneration. Front Pharmacol, 1110.3389/fphar.2020.00757 ↗