Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis
Abstract Bone scaffolds for tissue regeneration require an optimal trade-off between biological and mechanical criteria. Optimal designs may be obtained using topology optimization (homogenization approach) and prototypes produced using additive manufacturing techniques. However, the process from de...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical engineering & physics 2015-03, Vol.37 (3), p.287-296 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 296 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 287 |
container_title | Medical engineering & physics |
container_volume | 37 |
creator | Coelho, Pedro G Hollister, Scott J Flanagan, Colleen L Fernandes, Paulo R |
description | Abstract Bone scaffolds for tissue regeneration require an optimal trade-off between biological and mechanical criteria. Optimal designs may be obtained using topology optimization (homogenization approach) and prototypes produced using additive manufacturing techniques. However, the process from design to manufacture remains a research challenge and will be a requirement of FDA design controls to engineering scaffolds. This work investigates how the design to manufacture chain affects the reproducibility of complex optimized design characteristics in the manufactured product. The design and prototypes are analyzed taking into account the computational assumptions and the final mechanical properties determined through mechanical tests. The scaffold is an assembly of unit-cells, and thus scale size effects on the mechanical response considering finite periodicity are investigated and compared with the predictions from the homogenization method which assumes in the limit infinitely repeated unit cells. Results show that a limited number of unit-cells (3–5 repeated on a side) introduce some scale-effects but the discrepancies are below 10%. Higher discrepancies are found when comparing the experimental data to numerical simulations due to differences between the manufactured and designed scaffold feature shapes and sizes as well as micro-porosities introduced by the manufacturing process. However good regression correlations ( R2 > 0.85) were found between numerical and experimental values, with slopes close to 1 for 2 out of 3 designs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.004 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1661991347</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1350453315000132</els_id><sourcerecordid>1661991347</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-36cde5d4832c37e1acde91da480499717f4dbc94263102fe2f89bbc33bbd70af3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUsuO1DAQjBCIfcAvgI8cSLBj58UBaXfFS1ppD8DZcuz2rAdPPLiTlYYzH06HWfbAiZPdVnWVq7qL4qXgleCifbOtduBg2uxvD1XNRVNxUXGuHhWnou9kqbjkj-kuG16qRsqT4gxxywmhWvm0OKmbVvGeN6fFr8uQMmDKoxkjMLTG-xQdMp8yG9MEbA6ICzASCxNADtPmLbvZz2FnInOAYTO9Zt6MOVgzh0TFDuytmaiMbAacqYGZya3UEUoMP4nLe7Az0rOJBwz4rHjiTUR4fn-eF98-vP969am8vvn4-eriurTkYS5lax00TvWytrIDYagchDOq52oYOtF55UY7qLqVgtceat8P42ilHEfXcePlefHqyLvP6cdCf9O7gBZiNBOkBbVoWzEMQqqOoN0RanNCzOD1PpPlfNCC63UEeqsfRqDXEWguNAVMnS_uRZaREA99fzMnwMURAGT1LkDWaANMFlzIFIt2KfyHyLt_OGwMfzL_DgfAbVoyZUuONNaa6y_rJqyLIBpaAiFr-RvMprPN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1661991347</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Coelho, Pedro G ; Hollister, Scott J ; Flanagan, Colleen L ; Fernandes, Paulo R</creator><creatorcontrib>Coelho, Pedro G ; Hollister, Scott J ; Flanagan, Colleen L ; Fernandes, Paulo R</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Bone scaffolds for tissue regeneration require an optimal trade-off between biological and mechanical criteria. Optimal designs may be obtained using topology optimization (homogenization approach) and prototypes produced using additive manufacturing techniques. However, the process from design to manufacture remains a research challenge and will be a requirement of FDA design controls to engineering scaffolds. This work investigates how the design to manufacture chain affects the reproducibility of complex optimized design characteristics in the manufactured product. The design and prototypes are analyzed taking into account the computational assumptions and the final mechanical properties determined through mechanical tests. The scaffold is an assembly of unit-cells, and thus scale size effects on the mechanical response considering finite periodicity are investigated and compared with the predictions from the homogenization method which assumes in the limit infinitely repeated unit cells. Results show that a limited number of unit-cells (3–5 repeated on a side) introduce some scale-effects but the discrepancies are below 10%. Higher discrepancies are found when comparing the experimental data to numerical simulations due to differences between the manufactured and designed scaffold feature shapes and sizes as well as micro-porosities introduced by the manufacturing process. However good regression correlations ( R2 > 0.85) were found between numerical and experimental values, with slopes close to 1 for 2 out of 3 designs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1350-4533</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4030</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25640805</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biocompatible Materials ; Biofabrication ; Bone and Bones - cytology ; Bone scaffolds ; Homogenization ; Materials Testing ; Mechanical Phenomena ; Mechanical testing ; Multiscale models ; Radiology ; Tissue Engineering ; Tissue Scaffolds</subject><ispartof>Medical engineering & physics, 2015-03, Vol.37 (3), p.287-296</ispartof><rights>IPEM</rights><rights>2015 IPEM</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 IPEM. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-36cde5d4832c37e1acde91da480499717f4dbc94263102fe2f89bbc33bbd70af3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-36cde5d4832c37e1acde91da480499717f4dbc94263102fe2f89bbc33bbd70af3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1350453315000132$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25640805$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Coelho, Pedro G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollister, Scott J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flanagan, Colleen L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandes, Paulo R</creatorcontrib><title>Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis</title><title>Medical engineering & physics</title><addtitle>Med Eng Phys</addtitle><description>Abstract Bone scaffolds for tissue regeneration require an optimal trade-off between biological and mechanical criteria. Optimal designs may be obtained using topology optimization (homogenization approach) and prototypes produced using additive manufacturing techniques. However, the process from design to manufacture remains a research challenge and will be a requirement of FDA design controls to engineering scaffolds. This work investigates how the design to manufacture chain affects the reproducibility of complex optimized design characteristics in the manufactured product. The design and prototypes are analyzed taking into account the computational assumptions and the final mechanical properties determined through mechanical tests. The scaffold is an assembly of unit-cells, and thus scale size effects on the mechanical response considering finite periodicity are investigated and compared with the predictions from the homogenization method which assumes in the limit infinitely repeated unit cells. Results show that a limited number of unit-cells (3–5 repeated on a side) introduce some scale-effects but the discrepancies are below 10%. Higher discrepancies are found when comparing the experimental data to numerical simulations due to differences between the manufactured and designed scaffold feature shapes and sizes as well as micro-porosities introduced by the manufacturing process. However good regression correlations ( R2 > 0.85) were found between numerical and experimental values, with slopes close to 1 for 2 out of 3 designs.</description><subject>Biocompatible Materials</subject><subject>Biofabrication</subject><subject>Bone and Bones - cytology</subject><subject>Bone scaffolds</subject><subject>Homogenization</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>Mechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Mechanical testing</subject><subject>Multiscale models</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Tissue Engineering</subject><subject>Tissue Scaffolds</subject><issn>1350-4533</issn><issn>1873-4030</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNUsuO1DAQjBCIfcAvgI8cSLBj58UBaXfFS1ppD8DZcuz2rAdPPLiTlYYzH06HWfbAiZPdVnWVq7qL4qXgleCifbOtduBg2uxvD1XNRVNxUXGuHhWnou9kqbjkj-kuG16qRsqT4gxxywmhWvm0OKmbVvGeN6fFr8uQMmDKoxkjMLTG-xQdMp8yG9MEbA6ICzASCxNADtPmLbvZz2FnInOAYTO9Zt6MOVgzh0TFDuytmaiMbAacqYGZya3UEUoMP4nLe7Az0rOJBwz4rHjiTUR4fn-eF98-vP969am8vvn4-eriurTkYS5lax00TvWytrIDYagchDOq52oYOtF55UY7qLqVgtceat8P42ilHEfXcePlefHqyLvP6cdCf9O7gBZiNBOkBbVoWzEMQqqOoN0RanNCzOD1PpPlfNCC63UEeqsfRqDXEWguNAVMnS_uRZaREA99fzMnwMURAGT1LkDWaANMFlzIFIt2KfyHyLt_OGwMfzL_DgfAbVoyZUuONNaa6y_rJqyLIBpaAiFr-RvMprPN</recordid><startdate>20150301</startdate><enddate>20150301</enddate><creator>Coelho, Pedro G</creator><creator>Hollister, Scott J</creator><creator>Flanagan, Colleen L</creator><creator>Fernandes, Paulo R</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150301</creationdate><title>Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis</title><author>Coelho, Pedro G ; Hollister, Scott J ; Flanagan, Colleen L ; Fernandes, Paulo R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-36cde5d4832c37e1acde91da480499717f4dbc94263102fe2f89bbc33bbd70af3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Biocompatible Materials</topic><topic>Biofabrication</topic><topic>Bone and Bones - cytology</topic><topic>Bone scaffolds</topic><topic>Homogenization</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>Mechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Mechanical testing</topic><topic>Multiscale models</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Tissue Engineering</topic><topic>Tissue Scaffolds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Coelho, Pedro G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollister, Scott J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flanagan, Colleen L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandes, Paulo R</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical engineering & physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Coelho, Pedro G</au><au>Hollister, Scott J</au><au>Flanagan, Colleen L</au><au>Fernandes, Paulo R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis</atitle><jtitle>Medical engineering & physics</jtitle><addtitle>Med Eng Phys</addtitle><date>2015-03-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>287</spage><epage>296</epage><pages>287-296</pages><issn>1350-4533</issn><eissn>1873-4030</eissn><abstract>Abstract Bone scaffolds for tissue regeneration require an optimal trade-off between biological and mechanical criteria. Optimal designs may be obtained using topology optimization (homogenization approach) and prototypes produced using additive manufacturing techniques. However, the process from design to manufacture remains a research challenge and will be a requirement of FDA design controls to engineering scaffolds. This work investigates how the design to manufacture chain affects the reproducibility of complex optimized design characteristics in the manufactured product. The design and prototypes are analyzed taking into account the computational assumptions and the final mechanical properties determined through mechanical tests. The scaffold is an assembly of unit-cells, and thus scale size effects on the mechanical response considering finite periodicity are investigated and compared with the predictions from the homogenization method which assumes in the limit infinitely repeated unit cells. Results show that a limited number of unit-cells (3–5 repeated on a side) introduce some scale-effects but the discrepancies are below 10%. Higher discrepancies are found when comparing the experimental data to numerical simulations due to differences between the manufactured and designed scaffold feature shapes and sizes as well as micro-porosities introduced by the manufacturing process. However good regression correlations ( R2 > 0.85) were found between numerical and experimental values, with slopes close to 1 for 2 out of 3 designs.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>25640805</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.004</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1350-4533 |
ispartof | Medical engineering & physics, 2015-03, Vol.37 (3), p.287-296 |
issn | 1350-4533 1873-4030 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1661991347 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | Biocompatible Materials Biofabrication Bone and Bones - cytology Bone scaffolds Homogenization Materials Testing Mechanical Phenomena Mechanical testing Multiscale models Radiology Tissue Engineering Tissue Scaffolds |
title | Bioresorbable scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: Optimal design, fabrication, mechanical testing and scale-size effects analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T10%3A03%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bioresorbable%20scaffolds%20for%20bone%20tissue%20engineering:%20Optimal%20design,%20fabrication,%20mechanical%20testing%20and%20scale-size%20effects%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Medical%20engineering%20&%20physics&rft.au=Coelho,%20Pedro%20G&rft.date=2015-03-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=287&rft.epage=296&rft.pages=287-296&rft.issn=1350-4533&rft.eissn=1873-4030&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1661991347%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1661991347&rft_id=info:pmid/25640805&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1350453315000132&rfr_iscdi=true |