Scaffolds modified with graphene as future implants for nasal cartilage
Source abstract
Abstract
In this study, a 3D printing process was used to fabricate antibacterial polycaprolactone/graphene scaffolds using short filament sticks. The first part of the work focused on the manufacture of a strong and flexible filament, in the form of sticks for use in the existing FDM system without any hardware or software modification. New filament materials, which can be connected together, containing graphene nanoplatelets have been prepared at three levels of concentration: 0.5, 5 and 10 wt%. The PCL and graphene were processed into filaments using injection molding, and their morphology, FTIR, WAXS, ultrasonic wave propagation, and mechanical properties were measured. WAXS and ultrasonic tests confirmed the even distribution of graphene powder in the sample modified with 0.5 wt% of graphene. The presence of graphene in the samples improved their mechanical properties; however, 10 wt% of addition did not produce further tensile strength enhancement. The filaments were successfully tested in a commercially available 3D printer to evaluate their capacity to produce printed scaffolds for nasal cartilage replacement. Initial cell culture study has shown that printed scaffolds support the proliferation of chondrocytes.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications · 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (32)
Show source-provided references
1. Rajzer I, Menaszek E, Bacakova L, Orzelski M, Błażewicz M (2013) Hyluronic acid-coated carbon nonwoven fabrics as potential material for repair of osteochondral defects. Fibres Text East Eur 99(3):102–107
2. Patel K, Brandstetter K (2016) Solid implants in facial plastic surgery: potential complications and how to prevent them. Facial Plast Surg 32:520–531. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-158649710.1055/s-0036-1586497 ↗
3. Lavernia L, Brown WE, Wong BJF, Hua JC, Athanasiou KA (2019) Toward tissue-engineering of nasal cartilages. Acta Biomater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.02.02510.1016/j.actbio.2019.02.025 ↗
4. Ottoline AC, Tomita S, Marques MP, Felix F, Ferraiolo PN, Laurindo RS (2013) Antibiotic prophylaxis in otolaryngologic surgery. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 17(1):85–91. https://doi.org/10.7162/S1809-9777201300010001510.7162/S1809-97772013000100015 ↗
5. Rajzer I, Kurowska A, Jabłoński A, Jatteau S, Śliwka M, Ziąbka M, Menaszek E (2018) Layered gelatin/PLLA scaffolds fabricated by electrospinning and 3D printing- for nasal cartilages and subchondral bone reconstruction. Mater Des 155:297–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.06.01210.1016/j.matdes.2018.06.012 ↗
6. Jia A, Ee J, Teoh M, Suntornnond R, Chua CK (2015) Design and 3D printing of scaffolds and tissues. Engineering 1(2):261–268. https://doi.org/10.15302/J-ENG-201506110.15302/J-ENG-2015061 ↗
7. Bogun M, Mikolajczyk T, Kurzak A, Blazewicz M, Rajzer I (2006) Influence of the as-spun draw ratio on the structure and properties of PAN fibres including montmorillonite. Fibres Text East Eur 14(2):13–16
8. Gomes RN, Borges I, Pereira AT, Maia AF, Pestana M, Magalhães FD, Pinto AM, Gonçalves IC (2018) Antimicrobial graphene nanoplatelets coatings for silicone catheters. Carbon 139:635–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2018.06.04410.1016/j.carbon.2018.06.044 ↗
9. Chaudhuri B, Mondal B, Kumar S, Sarkar SC (2016) Myoblast differentiation and protein expression in electrospun graphene oxide (GO)-poly(ε-caprolactone, PCL) composite meshes. Mater Lett 182:194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.06.10710.1016/j.matlet.2016.06.107 ↗
10. Ionita M, Vlasceanu GM, Watzlawek AA, Voicu SI, Burns JS, Iovu H (2017) Graphene and functionalized graphene: extraordinary prospects for nanobiocomposite materials. Compos B 121:34–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.03.03110.1016/j.compositesb.2017.03.031 ↗
11. Shin SR, Li YC, Jang HL, Khoshakhlagh P, Akbari M, Nasajpour A, Zhang YS, Tamayol A, Khademhosseini A (2016) Graphene-based materials for tissue engineering. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 105:255–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.03.00710.1016/j.addr.2016.03.007 ↗
12. Pang L, Dai C, Bi L, Guo Z, Fan J (2017) biosafety and antibacterial ability of graphene and graphene oxide in vitro and in vivo. Nanoscale Res Lett 12(1):564. https://doi.org/10.1186/s11671-017-2317-010.1186/s11671-017-2317-0 ↗
13. An J, Teoh JEM, Suntornnond R, Chua CK (2015) Design and 3D printing of scaffolds and tissues. Engineering 1(2):261–268. https://doi.org/10.15302/J-ENG-201506110.15302/J-ENG-2015061 ↗
14. Zhang B, Seong B, Nguyen V, Byun D (2016) 3D printing of high-resolution PLA-based structures by hybrid electrohydrodynamic and fused deposition modeling techniques. J Micromech Microeng 26(2):025015. https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/26/2/02501510.1088/0960-1317/26/2/025015 ↗
15. Fereshteh Z, Fathi M, Bagri A, Boccaccini AR (2016) Preparation and characterization of aligned porous PCL/zein scaffolds as drug delivery systems via improved unidirectional freeze–drying method. Mater Sci Eng C 68:613–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.06.00910.1016/j.msec.2016.06.009 ↗
16. Domalik-Pyzik P, Morawska-Chochół A, Chłopek J, Rajzer I, Wrona A, Menaszek E, Ambroziak M (2016) Polylactide/polycaprolactone asymmetric membranes for guided bone regeneration. E-Polymers 16(5):351–358. https://doi.org/10.1515/epoly-2016-013810.1515/epoly-2016-0138 ↗
17. Rajzer I (2014) Fabrication of bioactive polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffolds with final bilayer nano-/micro-fibrous structures for tissue engineering application. J Mater Sci 49(16):5799–5807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-014-8311-10.1007/s10853-014-8311- ↗
18. Wang X, Jiang M, Zhou Z, Gou J, Hui D (2017) 3D printing of polymer matrix composites: a review and prospective. Compos B 110:442–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.03410.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.034 ↗
19. Park JS, Lee SJ, Jo HH, Lee JH, Kim WD, Lee JY, Park SA (2017) Fabrication and characterization of 3D-printed bone-like β-tricalcium phosphate/polycaprolactone scaffolds for dental tissue engineering. J Ind Eng Chem 46:175–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2016.10.02810.1016/j.jiec.2016.10.028 ↗
20. Qu X, Xia P, He J, Li D (2016) Microscale electrohydrodynamic printing of biomimetic PCL/nHA composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Lett 185:554–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.09.03510.1016/j.matlet.2016.09.035 ↗
21. Liu D, Nie W, Li D, Wang W, Zheng L, Zhang J, Zhang J, Peng C, Mo X, He C (2019) 3D printed PCL/SrHA scaffold for enhanced bone regeneration. Chem Eng J 362(15):269–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.01.01510.1016/j.cej.2019.01.015 ↗
22. Chaudhuri B, Bhadra D, Moroni L, Pramanik K (2015) Myoblast differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells on graphene oxide and electrospun graphene oxide–polymer composite fibrous meshes: importance of graphene oxide conductivity and dielectric constant on their biocompatibility. Biofabrication 7(1):015009. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/7/1/01500910.1088/1758-5090/7/1/015009 ↗
23. Vijayavenkataraman S, Thaharah S, Zhang S, Lu WF, Fuh JYH (2019) 3D-printed PCL/rGO conductive scaffolds for peripheral nerve injury repair. Artif Organs 43(5):515–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.1336010.1111/aor.13360 ↗
24. Qian Y, Zhao X, Han Q, Chen W, Li H, Yuan W (2018) An integrated multi-layer 3D-fabrication of PDA/RGD coated graphene loaded PCL nanoscaffold for peripheral nerve restoration. Nat Commun 9(1):323. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02598-710.1038/s41467-017-02598-7 ↗
25. Kim JS, Khan NA, Song HM, Jang YJ (2010) Intraoperative measurements of harvestable septal cartilage in rhinoplasty. Ann Plast Surg 65(6):519–523. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181d59f9510.1097/SAP.0b013e3181d59f95 ↗
26. Giboz J, Copponnex T, Mele P (2009) Microinjection molding of thermoplastic polymers: morphological comparison with conventional injection molding. J Micromech Microeng 19(2):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/19/2/02502310.1088/0960-1317/19/2/025023 ↗
27. Mavridis H, Hrymak AN, Vlachopoulos J (1986) Finite element simulation of fountain flow in injection molding. Polym Eng Sci 26(7):449–454. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.76026070210.1002/pen.760260702 ↗
28. Gautam S, Dinda AK, Mishra NC (2013) Fabrication and characterization of PCL/gelatin composite nanofibrous scaffold for tissue engineering applications by electrospinning method. Mater Sci Eng, C 33:1228–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2012.12.01510.1016/j.msec.2012.12.015 ↗
29. Bittiger H, Marchessault RH, Niegisch WD (1970) Crystal structure of poly-ε-caprolactone. Acta Crystallogr A B26:1923–1927. https://doi.org/10.1107/S056774087000519810.1107/S0567740870005198 ↗
30. Lee WC, Lim CH, Su C, Loh KP, Lim CT (2015) Cell-assembled graphene biocomposite for enhanced chondrogenic differentiation. Small 11:963–969. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.20140163510.1002/smll.201401635 ↗
31. Rajzer I, Piekarczyk W, Castaño O (2016) An ultrasonic through-transmission technique for monitoring the setting of injectable calcium phosphate cement. Mater Sci Eng C 67:20–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.04.08310.1016/j.msec.2016.04.083 ↗
32. Atif R, Inam F (2016) Reasons and remedies for the agglomeration of multilayered graphene and carbon nanotubes in polymers. Beilstein J Nanotechnol 7:1174–1196. https://doi.org/10.3762/2Fbjnano.7.10910.3762/2Fbjnano.7.109 ↗