4.5 Review

Fabrication techniques involved in developing the composite scaffolds PCL/HA nanoparticles for bone tissue engineering applications

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10856-021-06564-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Human Resources and Development, Government of India, New Delhi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article provides a brief overview of fabrication techniques for PCL/HA composite scaffolds, including sol-gel, rapid prototyping, electro-spinning, etc., which can tailor the morphological, mechanical, and biodegradability properties of the scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration. Among these methods, the 3D plotting method shows improvements in pore architecture, mechanical properties, biodegradability, and good bioactivity in bone tissue regeneration.
A fine-tuned combination of scaffolds, biomolecules, and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is used in tissue engineering to restore the function of injured bone tissue and overcome the complications associated with its regeneration. For two decades, biomaterials have attracted much interest in mimicking the native extracellular matrix of bone tissue. To this aim, several approaches based on biomaterials combined with MSCs have been amply investigated. Recently, hydroxyapatite (HA) nanoparticles have been incorporated with polycaprolactone (PCL) matrix as a suitable substitute for bone tissue engineering applications. This review article aims at providing a brief overview on PCL/HA composite scaffold fabrication techniques such as sol-gel, rapid prototyping, electro-spinning, particulate leaching, thermally induced phase separation, and freeze-drying, as suitable approaches for tailoring morphological, mechanical, and biodegradability properties of the scaffolds for bone tissues. Among these methods, the 3D plotting method shows improvements in pore architecture (pore size of >= 600 mu m and porosity of 92%), mechanical properties (higher than 18.38 MPa), biodegradability, and good bioactivity in bone tissue regeneration. [GRAPHICS] .

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据