Characterization of three-dimensional printed composite scaffolds prepared with different fabrication methods
Karol Szlązak , Jakub Jaroszewicz , Barbara Ostrowska , Tomasz Jaroszewicz , M. Nabiałek , M. Szota , Wojciech Święszkowski
AbstractAn optimal method for composites preparation as an input to rapid prototyping fabrication of scaffolds with potential application in osteochondral tissue engineering is still needed. Scaffolds in tissue engineering applications play a role of constructs providing appropriate mechanical support with defined porosity to assist regeneration of tissue. The aim of the presented study was to analyze the influence of composite fabrication methods on scaffolds mechanical properties. The evaluation was performed on polycaprolactone (PCL) with 5 wt% beta-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) scaffolds fabricated using fused deposition modeling (FDM). Three different methods of PCL-TCP composite preparation: solution casting, particles milling, extrusion and injection were used to provide material for scaffold fabrication. The obtained scaffolds were investigated by means of scanning electron microscope, x-ray micro computed tomography, thermal gravimetric analysis and static material testing machine. All of the scaffolds had the same geometry (cylinder, 4×6 mm) and fiber orientation (0/60/120°). There were some differences in the TCP distribution and formation of the ceramic agglomerates in the scaffolds. They depended on fabrication method. The use of composites prepared by solution casting method resulted in scaffolds with the best combination of compressive strength (5.7±0.2 MPa) and porosity (48.5±2.7 %), both within the range of trabecular bone.
|Journal series||Archives of Metallurgy and Materials, ISSN 1733-3490|
|Publication size in sheets||0.5|
|Keywords in English||polycaprolactone; tricalcium phosphate; scaffold; rapid prototyping; tissue engineering; computed tomography|
|Score|| = 0.0, 17-09-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
= 30.0, 17-09-2020, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||= 6; = 5; = 6.0; : 2016 = 0.804; : 2016 = 0.571 (2) - 2016=0.776 (5)|
|Citation count*||6 (2020-09-21)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.