journal article·2025-06-19Open access

How Does Ceramic-Based Scaffold Microarchitecture Impact Maxillofacial Bone Regeneration? A Systematic Review of Large Animal Models

Ana M. P. Baggio, Yannick M. Sillmann, Pascal Eber, Felicia R. S. Michallek, Joao L. G. C. Monteiro, Ana P. F. Bassi, Fernando P. S. Guastaldi

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 12

Abstract

Critical-sized bone defects (CSBDs) are injuries that exceed the body’s natural capacity for repair and require external intervention. These defects are particularly challenging in the mandible, often resulting from trauma, tumor resection, or implant-related complications. Effective treatment involves scaffold designs that support vascularization, bone formation, and sufficient mechanical strength. This systematic review aims to assess whether ceramic-based scaffold properties, including porosity, pore size, and macroscopic characteristics, improve vascularization, bone formation, and the mechanical properties in the treatment of CSBDs in large animal models. A search of databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) identified 11 in vivo studies involving CSBDs (>2 cm), ceramic scaffolds, and histological analysis. Findings indicate that scaffolds with porosity exceeding 50% yield optimal outcomes by striking a balance between cell infiltration and mechanical stability. Pore sizes ranging from 300 μm to 700 μm are ideal for vascularization and bone ingrowth. Three-dimensional (3D) printing shows promise in creating scaffolds with precise and reproducible features. However, the studies varied significantly in their methodologies and outcomes, with no consensus on the optimal scaffold properties for mandibular CSBDs. Scaffold porosity and pore size play key roles in promoting vascularization and bone regeneration. Various animal models reinforce this finding, suggesting that scaffold architecture is crucial for biological integration and functional outcomes. This review highlights the importance of standardized research protocols and clear design criteria in enhancing the success of bone regeneration. Future research should investigate emerging biomaterials and new scaffold technologies to overcome current limitations in clinical applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty

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

Affiliations

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02114, USA

Department of Diagnosis and Surgery, Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Aracatuba, SP 16015-050, Brazil

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Translational Implantology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center—University of Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany

Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA

Funding

Educational and Research Fund, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital (Boston, MA, USA)

References (46)

Show source-provided references
1. Biomaterial scaffolds in maxillofacial bone tissue engineering: A review of recent advances
2. Pillia, M., Guda, T., and Appleford, M. (2013). Development of Composite Scaffolds for Load-Bearing Segmental Bone Defects. Biomed. Res. Int., 2013.10.21236/ADA616641 ↗
3. Optimizing Design Parameters of PLA 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Bone Defect Repair10.3390/surgeries3030018 ↗
4. Biomimetic Design of 3D Printed Tissue-Engineered Bone Constructs10.2174/1573413716999201022191909 ↗
5. Systematic scoping review of mandibular bone tissue engineering10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.03.016 ↗
6. Bahraminasab, M. (2020). Challenges on optimization of 3D-printed bone scaffolds. BioMed. Eng. OnLine, 19.10.1186/s12938-020-00810-2 ↗
7. Size Matters: Defining Critical in Bone Defect Size!10.1097/BOT.0000000000000978 ↗
8. Significance and considerations of establishing standardized critical values for critical size defects in animal models of bone tissue regeneration10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33768 ↗
9. Regeneration of Critical-Sized Mandibular Defects Using 3D-Printed Composite Scaffolds: A Quantitative Evaluation of New Bone Formation in In Vivo Studies10.1002/adhm.202300128 ↗
10. Synthetic Calcium Phosphate Ceramics for Treatment of Bone Fractures10.2533/chimia.2010.723 ↗
11. Synthetic and Bone Tissue Engineering Graft Substitutes: What Is the Future?10.1016/j.injury.2020.07.040 ↗
12. Lattice Microarchitecture for Bone Tissue Engineering from Calcium Phosphate Compared to Titanium10.1089/ten.tea.2018.0014 ↗
13. Busch, A., Jäger, M., Mayer, C., and Sowislok, A. (2021). Functionalization of Synthetic Bone Substitutes. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 22.10.3390/ijms22094412 ↗
14. Compressive Strength of β-TCP Scaffolds Fabricated via Lithography-Based Manufacturing for Bone Tissue Engineering10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.02.085 ↗
15. 3D Printing of Ceramics: A Review10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2018.11.013 ↗
16. Additive Manufacturing of Ceramics: Issues, Potentialities, and Opportunities10.1111/jace.13700 ↗
17. Correlation between Properties and Microstructure of Laser Sintered Porous β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Scaffolds10.1088/1468-6996/14/5/055002 ↗
18. Baino, F., Novajra, G., and Vitale-Brovarone, C. (2015). Bioceramics and Scaffolds: A Winning Combination for Tissue Engineering. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol., 3.10.3389/fbioe.2015.00202 ↗
19. Personalized bioceramic grafts for craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration10.1038/s41368-024-00327-7 ↗
20. Tissue Engineering Approach to Bone Repair in Large Animal Models and in Clinical Practice10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.06.023 ↗
21. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews10.1136/bmj.n71 ↗
22. Kilkenny, C., Browne, W.J., Cuthill, I.C., Emerson, M., and Altman, D.G. (2010). Improving bioscience research reporting: The ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol., 8.10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412 ↗
23. Quality assessment of reporting of animal studies on pathogenesis and treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. A systematic review using the ARRIVE guidelines10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01838.x ↗
24. Induction, Treatment, and Prevention of Temporomandibular Joint Ankylosis-A Systematic Review of Comparative Animal Studies10.1016/j.joms.2020.07.018 ↗
25. Hooijmans, C.R., Rovers, M.M., de Vries, R.B., Leenaars, M., Ritskes-Hoitinga, M., and Langendam, M.W. (2014). SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool for animal studies. BMC Med. Res. Methodol., 14.10.1186/1471-2288-14-43 ↗
26. Prefabricated 3D-Printed Tissue-Engineered Bone for Mandibular Reconstruction: A Preclinical Translational Study in Primate10.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c00509 ↗
27. Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Three-Dimensional-Osteoconductive Scaffold Regenerate Calvarial Bone in Critical Size Defects in Swine10.1002/sctm.20-0534 ↗
28. Macroscopical, Histological, and Morphometric Studies of Porous Bone-Replacement Materials in Minipigs 8 Months after Implantation10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.10.034 ↗
29. Bone Marrow-Derived Osteoblasts Seeded into Porous Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate to Repair Segmental Defect in Canine’s Mandibula
30. Reconstruction of Mandibular Bone Defects Using Biphasic Calcium Phosphate Bone Substitutes with Simultaneous Implant Placement in Mini-Swine: A Pilot In Vivo Study10.1002/jbm.b.34299 ↗
31. Poly(Trimethylene Carbonate)-Based Composite Materials for Reconstruction of Critical-Sized Cranial Bone Defects in Sheep10.1016/j.jcms.2016.12.008 ↗
32. Standardized and Axially Vascularized Calcium Phosphate-Based Implants for Segmental Mandibular Defects: A Promising Proof of Concept10.1016/j.actbio.2022.09.071 ↗
33. A Novel Technique to Reconstruct a Boxlike Bone Defect in the Mandible and Support Dental Implants with In Vivo Tissue-Engineered Bone10.1002/jbm.b.31459 ↗
34. Scaffold Degradation During Bone Tissue Reconstruction in Macaca Nemestrina Mandible
35. Repair of canine mandibular bone defects with bone marrow stromal cells and porous β-tricalcium phosphate10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.10.015 ↗
36. Prefabrication technique by preserving a muscular pedicle from masseter muscle as an in vivo bioreactor for reconstruction of mandibular critical-sized bone defects in canine models10.1002/jbm.b.35028 ↗
37. Sillmann, Y.M., Eber, P., Orbeta, E., Wilde, F., Gross, A.J., and Guastaldi, F.P.S. (2025). Milestones in Mandibular Bone Tissue Engineering: A Systematic Review of Large Animal Models and Critical-Sized Defects. J. Clin. Med., 14.10.3390/jcm14082717 ↗
38. Bone defect animal models for testing efficacy of bone substitute biomaterials
39. Repairing a critical-sized bone defect with highly porous modified and unmodified baghdadite scaffolds10.1016/j.actbio.2012.07.036 ↗
40. Standardization of 3D printing parameters to control the size and shape of pores in polylactic acid scaffolds
41. Geometric and mechanical properties evaluation of scaffolds for bone tissue applications designing by a reaction-diffusion models and manufactured with a material jetting system
42. Application of 3D printing technology in bone tissue engineering: A review10.2174/18755704MTExsNDcy2 ↗
43. Hou, X., Zhang, L., Zhou, Z., Luo, X., Wang, T., Zhao, X., Lu, B., Chen, F., and Zheng, L. (2022). Calcium phosphate-based biomaterials for bone repair. J. Funct. Biomater., 13.10.3390/jfb13040187 ↗
44. Pires, L.C.A., da Silva, R.C., Poli, P.P., Ruas Esgalha, F., Hadad, H., Palin, L.P., Piquera Santos, A.F., Teixiera Colombo, L., Kawamata de Jesus, L., and Bassi, A.P.F. (2020). Evaluation of osteoconduction of a synthetic hydroxyapatite/β-tricalcium phosphate block fixed in rabbit mandibles. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13214902 ↗
45. Zhu, L., Liu, Y., Wang, A., Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Zhu, C., Che, Z., Mon, T., Liu, H., and Huang, L. (2022). Application of BMP in bone tissue engineering. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol., 10.10.3389/fbioe.2022.810880 ↗
46. Farjaminejad, R., Farjaminejad, S., Hasani, M., Garcia-Godoy, F., Sayahpour, B., Marya, A., and Jamilian, A. (2025). The Role of Tissue Engineering in Orthodontic and Orthognathic Treatment: A Narrative Review. Oral, 5.10.3390/oral5010021 ↗