3D printing has recently emerged as an innovative fabrication method to construct critical-sized and patient-specific bone scaffolds. The ability to control the bulk geometry of scaffolds in both macro and micro-scales distinguishes this technology from other fabrication methods. In this study, bone tissue-specific scaffolds with different pore geometries were printed from polylactic acid (PLA) filaments at three given infill densities ranging from 20 to 30%. A hybrid hydrogel made of synthetic biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) and collagen was applied to coat 3D printed well-structured triangular samples with 30% infill density. The coating process changed the surface texture, increased the average strand diameter and average pore size, and decreased the open porosity of samples, all of which increased the mechanical strength of biomimetic-coated scaffolds. According to matrix mineralization staining and osteo-related gene expression, the coating of scaffolds significantly facilitates metabolic activity and osteogenic differentiation of dental pulp-derived mesenchymal stem cells (DPSCs). Taken together, these results indicated that the biomimetic coating is a highly promising approach that could be taken into consideration in the design of a porous scaffold for bone tissue engineering.
Marolt PresenDTrawegerAGimonaM, et al.Mesenchymal stromal cell-based bone regeneration therapies: from cell transplantation and tissue engineering to therapeutic secretomes and extracellular vesicles. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2019; 7: 352.
2.
CollinsMNRenGYoungK, et al.Scaffold fabrication technologies and structure/function properties in bone tissue engineering. Adv Funct Mater2021; 31: 2010609.
3.
AbbasiNHamletSLoveRM, et al.Porous scaffolds for bone regeneration. J of Sci: Adv Mater and Dev2020; 5: 1–9.
4.
ChiaHNWuBM. Recent advances in 3D printing of biomaterials. J of Biolog Eng2015; 9: 4.
5.
WeberFE. Reconsidering osteoconduction in the era of additive manufacturing. Tissue Eng B: Rev2019; 25: 375–386.
6.
AlsoufiMSAlhazmiMWSukerDK, et al.Experimental characterization of the influence of nozzle temperature in FDM 3D printed pure PLA and advanced PLA+. Am J Mech Eng2019; 7: 45–60.
7.
RajpurohitSRDaveHKJRPJ. Effect of process parameters on tensile strength of FDM printed PLA part, Rapid Prototyping Journal2018; 24.
8.
ShuaiCYuLFengP, et al.Interfacial reinforcement in bioceramic/biopolymer composite bone scaffold: The role of coupling agent. Colloids Surf B2020; 193: 111083.
9.
ZhangBWangLSongP, et al.3D printed bone tissue regenerative PLA/HA scaffolds with comprehensive performance optimizations. Mater & Desig201; 2021: 109490.
10.
KowalczykPTrzaskowskaPŁojszczykI, et al.Production of 3D printed polylactide scaffolds with surface grafted hydrogel coatings. Colloids Surf B2019; 179: 136–142.
11.
WangWZhangBLiM, et al.3D printing of PLA/n-HA composite scaffolds with customized mechanical properties and biological functions for bone tissue engineering. Compos B: Eng2021; 224: 109192.
12.
NájeraSEMichelMKimN-S. 3D Printed PLA/PCL/TiO2 composite for bone replacement and grafting. MRS Adv2018; 3: 2373–2378. DOI: 10.1557/adv.2018.375.
13.
CuiffoMASnyderJElliottAM, et al.Impact of the fused deposition (FDM) printing process on polylactic acid (PLA) chemistry and structure. Appl Sci2017; 7: 579.
14.
KaoC-TLinC-CChenY-W, et al.Poly (dopamine) coating of 3D printed poly (lactic acid) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci and Eng C2015; 56: 165–173.
15.
YehC-HChenY-WShieM-Y, et al.Poly (dopamine)-assisted immobilization of Xu Duan on 3D printed poly (lactic acid) scaffolds to up-regulate osteogenic and angiogenic markers of bone marrow stem cells. Materials2015; 8: 4299–4315.
16.
ZhaoXGHwangK-JLeeD, et al.Enhanced mechanical properties of self-polymerized polydopamine-coated recycled PLA filament used in 3D printing. Appl Surf Sci2018; 441: 381–387.
17.
TeixeiraBNAprilePMendonçaRH, et al.Evaluation of bone marrow stem cell response to PLA scaffolds manufactured by 3D printing and coated with polydopamine and type I collagen. J Biomed Mater Res B2019; 107: 37–49, DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.34093.
18.
ChakkaJLAcriTLairdNZ, et al.Polydopamine functionalized VEGF gene-activated 3D printed scaffolds for bone regeneration. RSC Adv2021; 11: 13282–13291.
19.
SchneiderMGünterCTaubertA. Co-Deposition of a Hydrogel/Calcium Phosphate Hybrid Layer on 3D Printed Poly(Lactic Acid) Scaffolds via Dip Coating: Towards Automated Biomaterials Fabrication. Poly (Basel)2018; 10: 275. DOI: 10.3390/polym10030275.
20.
AsgarpourRMasaeliEKermaniS. Development of meniscus‐inspired 3D‐printed PCL scaffolds engineered with chitosan/extracellular matrix hydrogel. Poly for Adv Techn2021; 32: 47–214732.
21.
ChiulanIFroneANBrandaburC, et al.Recent advances in 3D printing of aliphatic polyesters. Bioengineering2018; 5: 2.
22.
FirooziMEntezamMMasaeliE, et al.Physical modification approaches to enhance cell supporting potential of poly (vinyl alcohol)-based hydrogels. J of App Poly Sci2022; 139: 51485, DOI: 10.1002/app.51485
23.
MasaeliEKaramaliFLoghmaniS, et al.Bio-engineered electrospun nanofibrous membranes using cartilage extracellular matrix particles. J of Mater Chem B2017; 5: 765–776.
24.
ShiwakuYTsuchiyaKXiaoL, et al.Effect of calcium phosphate phases affecting the crosstalk between osteoblasts and osteoclasts in vitro. J of Biomed Mater Res A2019; 107: 1001–1013.
25.
LuJYuHChenC. Biological properties of calcium phosphate biomaterials for bone repair: a review. RSC Adv2018; 8: 2015–2033.
26.
MironRJSculeanAShuangY, et al.Osteoinductive potential of a novel biphasic calcium phosphate bone graft in comparison with autographs, xenografts, and DFDBA. Clin Oral Impl Res2016; 27: 668–675.
27.
MironRJZhangQSculeanA, et al.Osteoinductive potential of 4 commonly employed bone grafts. J Clin Oral Investig2016; 20: 2259–2265.
28.
Jahir-HussainMMaarufNEsaN, et al.The effect of pore geometry on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed bone scaffold due to compressive loading. In: Processdings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 2021. Bristol, UK, 2021.
29.
LiangXGaoJXuW, et al.Structural mechanics of 3D-printed poly (lactic acid) scaffolds with tetragonal, hexagonal and wheel-like designs. Biofabrication2019; 11: 035009.
30.
Amani Maulat Che OmarNAzlin ZakariaNWan SafuanWS, et al.Analysis of 3D-printed hexagon pore for scaffold fabrication. J of Tomography Sys & Sensors Appl2020; 3: 42–47.
31.
ZhaoHLiLDingS, et al.Effect of porous structure and pore size on mechanical strength of 3D-printed comby scaffolds. Mater Letters2018; 223: 21–24, DOI: 10.1016/j.matlet.2018.03.205.
32.
WurmMCMöstTBergauerB, et al.In-vitro evaluation of Polylactic acid (PLA) manufactured by fused deposition modeling. J of Biolo Eng2017; 11: 1–9.
33.
WastiSAdhikariS. Use of biomaterials for 3D printing by fused deposition modeling technique: a review. Front in Chem2020; 8: 315.
34.
MurariuMDuboisP. PLA composites: from production to properties. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2016; 107: 17–46.
35.
BaptistaRGuedesMPereiraMFC, et al.On the effect of design and fabrication parameters on mechanical performance of 3D printed PLA scaffolds. Bioprinting2020; 20: e00096, DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00096.
36.
HamedEJasiukIYooA, et al.Multi-scale modelling of elastic moduli of trabecular bone. J R Soc Interface2012; 9: 1654–1673.
37.
KimD-GJeongY-HKoselE, et al.Regional variation of bone tissue properties at the human mandibular condyle. Bone2015; 77: 98–106.
38.
ZengSYeJCuiZ, et al.Surface biofunctionalization of three-dimensional porous poly (lactic acid) scaffold using chitosan/OGP coating for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C2017; 77: 92–101.
39.
ChenWNicholsLBrinkleyF, et al.Alkali treatment facilitates functional nano-hydroxyapatite coating of 3D printed polylactic acid scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C2021; 120: 111686.
40.
BarbeckMSerraTBoomsP, et al.Analysis of the in vitro degradation and the in vivo tissue response to bi-layered 3D-printed scaffolds combining PLA and biphasic PLA/bioglass components – guidance of the inflammatory response as basis for osteochondral regeneration. Bioactive Mater2017; 2: 208–223, DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.06.001.
41.
MasaeliEMorshedMRasekhianP, et al.Does the tissue engineering architecture of poly (3‐hydroxybutyrate) scaffold affects cell–material interactions?J of Biomed Mater Res A2012; 100: 1907–1918.
42.
GuyotYPapantoniouIChaiYC, et al.A computational model for cell/ECM growth on 3D surfaces using the level set method: a bone tissue engineering case study. Biomech Model in Mechanobiol2014; 13: 1361–1371.
43.
BidanCMKommareddyKPRumplerM, et al.Geometry as a factor for tissue growth: towards shape optimization of tissue engineering scaffolds. Adv Healthc Mater2013; 2: 186–194.
44.
XiaoDZhangJZhangC, et al.The role of calcium phosphate surface structure in osteogenesis and the mechanisms involved. Acta Biomater2020; 106: 22–33.
45.
WangYPanJZhangY, et al.Wnt and notch signaling pathways in calcium phosphate‐enhanced osteogenic differentiation: a pilot study. J of Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater2019; 107: 149–160.
