Structural analysis of porous bioactive glass scaffolds using micro-computed tomographic images
Source abstract
Abstract
Three-dimensional structural properties such as pore size, interconnectivity, and tortuosity of scaffold play an essential role in bone tissue regeneration. We report the structural characterization of bioactive glass-based scaffolds by employing micro-computed tomography (µCT) imaging. µCT images were filtered and binarized to get 3D reconstruction of the scaffold. Fast march method was applied on 3D reconstructed scaffold to estimate tortuosity. Further, Canny edge detection algorithm was used to identify pore boundaries. Graph traversal algorithm was used to identify pore networks as open, close, and through. Pore and minimum throat size for a through path were quantified using equivalent circle diameter based on ASTM F2603-06. The porosity (66.69%), mean pore size (443 µm), mean pore throat diameter (131 µm), and tortuosity in different planes (~ 1) imply suitability of the scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Any porous sample can be characterized by the methodology directly with µCT or other imaging techniques.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Dental materials and restorations · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Hench LL (1997) Sol-gel materials for bioceramic applications. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 2:604–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-0286(97)80053-810.1016/S1359-0286(97)80053-8 ↗
2. Woodard JR, Hilldore AJ, Lan SK, Park CJ, Morgan AW, Eurell JAC, Clark SG, Wheeler MB, Jamison RD et al (2007) The mechanical properties and osteoconductivity of hydroxyapatite bone scaffolds with multi-scale porosity. Biomaterials 28:45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.08.02110.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.08.021 ↗
3. Kim HW, Lee SY, Bae CJ, Noh YJ, Kim HE, Kim HM, Ko JS (2003) Porous ZrO2 bone scaffold coated with hydroxyapatite with fluorapatite intermediate layer. Biomaterials 24:3277–3284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00162-510.1016/S0142-9612(03)00162-5 ↗
4. Masoudi Rad M, Nouri Khorasani S, Ghasemi-Mobarakeh L, Prabhakaran MP, Foroughi MR, Kharaziha M, Saadatkish N, Ramakrishna S (2017) Fabrication and characterization of two-layered nanofibrous membrane for guided bone and tissue regeneration application. Mater Sci Eng C 80:75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.05.12510.1016/j.msec.2017.05.125 ↗
5. Hoppe A, Güldal NS, Boccaccini AR (2011) A review of the biological response to ionic dissolution products from bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. Biomaterials 32:2757–2774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.00410.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.004 ↗
6. Miola M, Verné E, Vitale-Brovarone C, Baino F (2016) Antibacterial bioglass-derived scaffolds: innovative synthesis approach and characterization. Int J Appl Glass Sci 7:238–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijag.1220910.1111/ijag.12209 ↗
7. Rahaman M, Day D, Bal BS, Fu Q (2011) Bioactive glass in tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 7:2355–2373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2011.03.016.Bioactive10.1016/j.actbio.2011.03.016.Bioactive ↗
8. Vallet-Regí M (2001) Ceramics for medical applications. J Chem Soc Dalt Trans 1:97–108. https://doi.org/10.1039/b007852m10.1039/b007852m ↗
9. Lemon G, Reinwald Y, White LJ, Howdle SM, Shakesheff KM, King JR (2012) Interconnectivity analysis of supercritical CO2-foamed scaffolds. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 106:139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2010.08.01010.1016/j.cmpb.2010.08.010 ↗
10. Shanti NO, Chan VWL, Stock SR, De Carlo F, Thornton K, Faber KT (2014) X-ray micro-computed tomography and tortuosity calculations of percolating pore networks. Acta Mater 71:126–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2014.03.00310.1016/j.actamat.2014.03.003 ↗
11. Starly B, Yildirim E, Sun W (2007) A tracer metric numerical model for predicting tortuosity factors in three-dimensional porous tissue scaffolds. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 87:21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2007.04.00310.1016/j.cmpb.2007.04.003 ↗
12. Jones AC, Arns CH, Hutmacher DW, Milthorpe BK, Sheppard AP, Knackstedt MA (2009) The correlation of pore morphology, interconnectivity and physical properties of 3D ceramic scaffolds with bone ingrowth. Biomaterials 30:1440–1451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.10.05610.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.10.056 ↗
13. Dong H, Blunt MJ (2009) Pore-network extraction from micro-computerized-tomography images. Phys Rev E 80:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.80.03630710.1103/PhysRevE.80.036307 ↗
14. Mohee L, Offeddu GS, Husmann A, Oyen ML, Cameron RE (2018) Investigation of the intrinsic permeability of ice-templated collagen scaffolds as a function of their structural and mechanical properties. Acta Biomater 83:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2018.10.03410.1016/j.actbio.2018.10.034 ↗
15. Zhang X, Tiainen H, Haugen HJ (2018) Comparison of titanium dioxide scaffold with commercial bone graft materials through micro-finite element modelling in flow perfusion. Med Biol Eng Comput 57:311–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-018-1884-210.1007/s11517-018-1884-2 ↗
16. Jones JR, Poologasundarampillai G, Atwood RC, Bernard D, Lee PD (2007) Non-destructive quantitative 3D analysis for the optimisation of tissue scaffolds. Biomaterials 28:1404–1413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.11.01410.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.11.014 ↗
17. Falvo D’Urso Labate G, Catapano G, Vitale-Brovarone C, Baino F (2017) Quantifying the micro-architectural similarity of bioceramic scaffolds to bone. Ceram Int 43:9443–9450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.04.12110.1016/j.ceramint.2017.04.121 ↗
18. Murphy WL, Dennis RG, Kileny JL, Mooney DJ (2002) Salt fusion: an approach to improve pore interconnectivity within tissue engineering scaffolds. Tissue Eng 8:43–52. https://doi.org/10.1089/10763270275350304510.1089/107632702753503045 ↗
19. Ho ST, Hutmacher DW (2006) A comparison of micro CT with other techniques used in the characterization of scaffolds. Biomaterials 27:1362–1376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.08.03510.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.08.035 ↗
20. Van Bael S, Chai YC, Truscello S, Moesen M, Kerckhofs G, Van Oosterwyck H, Kruth J-P, 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 ↗
21. Davis GR, Elliott JC (2006) Artefacts in X-ray microtomography of materials. Mater Sci Technol 22:1011–1018. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328406X11411710.1179/174328406X114117 ↗
22. Otsuki B, Takemoto M, Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Kokubo T, Nakamura T (2006) Pore throat size and connectivity determine bone and tissue ingrowth into porous implants: three-dimensional micro-CT based structural analyses of porous bioactive titanium implants. Biomaterials 27:5892–5900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.08.01310.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.08.013 ↗
23. Truscello S, Kerckhofs G, Van Bael S, Pyka G, Schrooten J, Van Oosterwyck H (2012) Prediction of permeability of regular scaffolds for skeletal tissue engineering: a combined computational and experimental study. Acta Biomater 8:1648–1658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2011.12.02110.1016/j.actbio.2011.12.021 ↗
24. Latief FDE (2016) Analysis and visualization of 2D and 3D grain and pore size of fontainebleau sandstone using digital rock physics. J Phys Conf Ser 739:2–10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/739/1/01204710.1088/1742-6596/739/1/012047 ↗
25. Sethian JA (1996) A fast marching level set method for monotonically advancing fronts. Proc Natl Acad Sci 93:1591–1595. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.111.479.1009-a10.1192/bjp.111.479.1009-a ↗
26. Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9:62–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1979.431007610.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076 ↗
27. Mangan AP, Whitaker RT (1999) Partitioning 3D surface meshes using watershed segmentation. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 5:308–321. https://doi.org/10.1109/2945.81734810.1109/2945.817348 ↗
28. ASTM F2603-06 (2009) Standard Guide for Interpreting Images of Polymeric Tissue Scaffolds
29. Avizo 9 (2016) User Guide
30. Moore MJ, Jabbari E, Ritman EL, Lu L, Currier BL, Windebank AJ, Yaszemski MJ (2004) Quantitative analysis of interconnectivity of porous biodegradable scaffolds with micro-computed tomography. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 71:258–267. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3013810.1002/jbm.a.30138 ↗
31. Lin CL, Miller JD (2000) Network analysis of filter cake pore structure by high resolution X-ray microtomography. Chem Eng J 77:79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1385-8947(99)00149-710.1016/S1385-8947(99)00149-7 ↗
32. Camp JJ, Hann CR, Johnson DH, Tarara JE, Robb RA (2006) Three-dimensional reconstruction of aqueous channels in human trabecular meshwork using light microscopy and confocal microscopy. Scanning 19:258–263. https://doi.org/10.1002/sca.495019040210.1002/sca.4950190402 ↗
33. Canny J (1986) A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell PAMI 8:679–698. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1986.476785110.1109/TPAMI.1986.4767851 ↗
34. Liu X, Rahaman MN, Fu Q, Tomsia AP (2012) Porous and strong bioactive glass (13–93) scaffolds prepared by unidirectional freezing of camphene-based suspensions. Acta Biomater 8:415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2011.07.03410.1016/j.actbio.2011.07.034 ↗
35. Botchwey EA, Dupree MA, Pollack SR, Levine EM, Laurencin CT (2003) Tissue engineered bone: measurement of nutrient transport in three-dimensional matrices. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 67:357–367. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.1011110.1002/jbm.a.10111 ↗
36. Hutmacher DW (2000) Scaffolds in tissue engineering bone and cartilage. Biomaterials 21:2529–2543. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00121-610.1016/S0142-9612(00)00121-6 ↗
37. Aaron SG, Guoming Z, Grayson EM, Rudolf KM (1999) Effect of osteoblastic culture conditions on the structure of poly(DL-lactic-co-glycolic acid) foam scaffolds. Tissue Eng 5:421–433. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.1999.5.42110.1089/ten.1999.5.421 ↗
38. Kasten P, Beyen I, Niemeyer P, Luginbühl R, Bohner M, Richter W (2008) Porosity and pore size of β-tricalcium phosphate scaffold can influence protein production and osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells: an in vitro and in vivo study. Acta Biomater 4:1904–1915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2008.05.01710.1016/j.actbio.2008.05.017 ↗
39. Roth J, Davatzes NC, Davatzes AEK (2013) Investigating the volume and structure of porosity in fractured and unfractured rock from the Newberry Volcano, Oregon, USA : evaluation of two- and three-dimensional methods. GRC Trans 37:209–216
40. Suh SW, Shin JY, Kim J, Kim J, Beak CH, Kim DI, Kim H, Jeon SS, Choo IW (2002) Effect of different particles on cell proliferation in polymer scaffolds using a solvent-casting and particulate leaching technique. ASAIO J 48:460–464. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002480-200209000-0000310.1097/00002480-200209000-00003 ↗
41. Hulbert SF, Young FA, Mathews RS, Klawitter JJ, Talbert CD, Stelling FH (1970) Potential of ceramic materials as permanently implantable skeletal prostheses. J Biomed Mater Res 4:433–456. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.82004030910.1002/jbm.820040309 ↗
42. Jones AC, Arns CH, Sheppard AP, Hutmacher DW, Milthorpe BK, Knackstedt MA (2007) Assessment of bone ingrowth into porous biomaterials using MICRO-CT. Biomaterials 28:2491–2504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.01.04610.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.01.046 ↗
43. ASTM F2450-18 (2018) Standard guide for assessing microstructure of polymeric scaffolds for use in tissue-engineered medical products
44. Bartos M, Suchy T, Foltan R (2018) Note on the use of different approaches to determine the pore sizes of tissue engineering scaffolds: what do we measure? Biomed Eng Online 17:110. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0543-z10.1186/s12938-018-0543-z ↗
45. Mastrogiacomo M, Scaglione S, Martinetti R, Dolcini L, Beltrame F, Cancedda R, Quarto R (2006) Role of scaffold internal structure on in vivo bone formation in macroporous calcium phosphate bioceramics. Biomaterials 27:3230–3237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.03110.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.031 ↗
46. Lu JX, Lautr BFE, Elme KANS, Ardoui PHN (1999) Role of interconnections in porous bioceramics on bone recolonization in vitro and in vivo. J Mater Sci Mater Med 10:111–120. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100897312091810.1023/A:1008973120918 ↗
47. Jones JR, Ehrenfried LM, Hench LL (2006) Optimising bioactive glass scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 27:964–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.07.01710.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.07.017 ↗
48. Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D (2005) Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 26:5474–5491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.00210.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002 ↗
49. Atwood RC, Jones JR, Lee PD, Hench LL (2004) Analysis of pore interconnectivity in bioactive glass foams using X-ray microtomography. Scr Mater 51:1029–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2004.08.01410.1016/j.scriptamat.2004.08.014 ↗
50. Reinwald Y, Johal RK, Ghaemmaghami AM, Rose FRAJ, Howdle SM, Shakesheff KM (2014) Interconnectivity and permeability of supercritical fluid-foamed scaffolds and the effect of their structural properties on cell distribution. Polymer (Guildf) 55:435–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2013.09.04110.1016/j.polymer.2013.09.041 ↗