4.4 Article

Three-dimensional printing of porous ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30291

Keywords

3D printing; scaffolds; bone tissue engineering; hydroxyapatite; rapid prototyping

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article reports a new process chain for custom-made three-dimensional (3D) porous ceramic scaffolds for bone replacement with fully interconnected channel network for the repair of osseous defects from trauma or disease. Rapid prototyping and especially 3D printing is well suited to generate complex-shaped porous ceramic matrices directly from powder materials. Anatomical information obtained from a patient can be used to design the implant for a target defect. In the 3D printing technique, a box filled with ceramic powder is printed with a polymer-based binder solution layer by layer. Powder is bonded in wetted regions. Unglued powder can be removed and a ceramic green body remains. We use a modified hydroxyapatite (HA) powder for the fabrication of 3D printed scaffolds due to the safety of HA as biocompatible implantable material and efficacy for bone regeneration. The printed ceramic green bodies are consolidated at a temperature of 1250 degrees C in a high temperature furnace in ambient air. The polymeric binder is pyrolysed during sintering. The resulting scaffolds can be used in tissue engineering of bone implants using patient-derived cells that are seeded onto the scaffolds.This article describes the process chain, beginning from data preparation to 3D printing tests and finally sintering of the scaffold. Prototypes were successfully manufactured and characterized. It was demonstrated that it is possible to manufacture parts with inner channels with a dimension down to 450 mu m and wall structures with a thickness down to 330 mu m. The mechanical strength of dense test parts is up to 22 MPa. (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available