Comparison of titanium dioxide scaffold with commercial bone graft materials through micro-finite element modelling in flow perfusion
- 160 Downloads
TiO2 scaffolds have previously shown to have promising osteoconductive properties in previous in vivo experiments. Appropriate mechanical stimuli can further promote this osteoconductive behaviour. However, the complex mechanical environment and the mechanical stimuli enhancing bone regeneration for porous bioceramics have not yet been fully elucidated. This paper aims to compare and evaluate mechanical environment of TiO2 scaffold with three commercial CaP biomaterials, i.e. Bio-Oss, Cerabone and Maxresorb under simulated perfusion culture conditions. The solid phase and fluid phase were modelled as linear elastic material and Newtonian fluid, respectively. The mechanical stimulus was analysed within these porous scaffolds quantitatively. The results showed that the TiO2 had nearly heterogeneous stress distributions, however lower effective Young’s modulus than Cerabone and Maxresorb. The permeability and wall shear stress (WSS) for the TiO2 scaffold was significantly higher than other commercial bone substitute materials. Maxresorb and Bio-Oss showed lowest permeability and local areas of very high WSS. The detailed description of the mechanical performance of these scaffolds could help researchers to predict cell behaviour and to select the most appropriate scaffold for different in vitro and in vivo performances.
KeywordsScaffold Finite element method Titanium dioxide Micro-CT CFD
The authors acknowledge Catherine Heyward (Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo) for her revisions for the paper and Jonas Wengenroth (Department of Biomaterials, University of Oslo) for his assistance with the micro-CT scanning, respectively.
This study was supported by the Research Council of Norway (grant 228415), UNINETT Sigma2 AS which manages the national infrastructure for computational science in Norway and offers services in high-performance computing and data storage (grant number NN9371K) and FEM analysis of novel bone graft substitutes and grant from the China Scholarship Council (CSC).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Tiainen and Haugen hold patents behind the technology for the TiO2 scaffolds (EP Patent 2,121,053, US Patent 9,629,941, US Patent App. 14/427,901, US Patent App. 14/427,683 and US Patent App. 14/427,854). The rights for these patents are shared between the University of Oslo and Corticalis AS. Haugen is a shareholder and board member of Corticalis AS.
- 2.Yan HR, Liu X, Zhu MH, Luo GL, Sun T, Peng Q, Zeng Y, Chen TJ, Wang YY, Liu KL, Feng B, Weng J, Wang JX (2016) Hybrid use of combined and sequential delivery of growth factors and ultrasound stimulation in porous multilayer composite scaffolds to promote both vascularization and bone formation in bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A 104:195–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35556 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Haugen HJ, Monjo M, Rubert M, Verket A, Lyngstadaas SP, Ellingsen JE, Ronold HJ, Wohlfahrt JC (2013) Porous ceramic titanium dioxide scaffolds promote bone formation in rabbit peri-implant cortical defect model. Acta Biomater 9:5390–5399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2012.09.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Byrne DP, Lacroix D, Planell JA, Kelly DJ, Prendergast PJ (2007) Simulation of tissue differentiation in a scaffold as a function of porosity, Young’s modulus and dissolution rate: application of mechanobiological models in tissue engineering. Biomaterials 28:5544–5554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.09.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Stops AJF, Heraty KB, Browne M, O'Brien FJ, McHugh PE (2010) A prediction of cell differentiation and proliferation within a collagen-glycosaminoglycan scaffold subjected to mechanical strain and perfusive fluid flow. J Biomech 43:618–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.10.037 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Milan JL, Planell JA, Lacroix D (2009) Computational modelling of the mechanical environment of osteogenesis within a polylactic acid-calcium phosphate glass scaffold. Biomaterials 30:4219–4226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.026 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Olivares AL, Marshal E, Planell JA, Lacroix D (2009) Finite element study of scaffold architecture design and culture conditions for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 30:6142–6149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.07.041 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Lin LL, Lu YJ, Fang ML (2015) Computational modeling of the fluid mechanical environment of regular and irregular scaffolds. Int J Control Autom 12:529–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-014-0873-7
- 13.Farzadi A, Waran V, Solati-Hashjin M, Rahman ZAA, Asadi M, Abu Osman NA (2015) Effect of layer printing delay on mechanical properties and dimensional accuracy of 3D printed porous prototypes in bone tissue engineering. Ceram Int 41:8320–8330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Eshraghi S, Das S (2010) Mechanical and microstructural properties of polycaprolactone scaffolds with one-dimensional, two-dimensional, and three-dimensional orthogonally oriented porous architectures produced by selective laser sintering. Acta Biomater 6:2467–2476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.02.002 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 15.Fostad G, Hafell B, Forde A, Dittmann R, Sabetrasekh R, Will J, Ellingsen JE, Lyngstadaas SP, Haugen HJ (2009) Loadable TiO2 scaffolds-a correlation study between processing parameters, micro CT analysis and mechanical strength. J Eur Ceram Soc 29:2773–2781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2009.03.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Tiainen H, Wiedmer D, Haugen HJ (2013) Processing of highly porous TiO2 bone scaffolds with improved compressive strength. J Eur Ceram Soc 33:15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2012.08.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Rumian L, Reczynska K, Wrona M, Tiainen H, Haugen HJ, Pamula E (2015) The influence of sintering conditions on microstructure and mechanical properties of titanium dioxide scaffolds for the treatment of bone tissue defects. Acta Bioeng Biomech 17:3–9. https://doi.org/10.5277/Abb-00129-2014-02 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D (2005) Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 26:5474–5491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Mate Sanchez de Val JE, Calvo-Guirado JL, Gomez-Moreno G, Perez-Albacete Martinez C, Mazon P, De Aza PN (2016) Influence of hydroxyapatite granule size, porosity, and crystallinity on tissue reaction in vivo. Part A: synthesis, characterization of the materials, and SEM analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 27:1331–1338. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12722 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Zhang XB, Gong H (2015) Simulation on tissue differentiations for different architecture designs in bone tissue engineering scaffold based on cellular structure model. J Mech Med Biol 15. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219519415500281
- 31.Miranda P, Pajares A, Guiberteau F (2008) Finite element modeling as a tool for predicting the fracture behaviour of robocast scaffolds. Acta Biomater 4:1715–1724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2008.05.020
- 33.Ebrahimian-Hosseinabadi M, Ashrafizadeh F, Etemadifar M, Venkatraman SS (2011) Evaluating and modeling the mechanical properties of the prepared PLGA/nano-BCP composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Sci Technol 27:1105–1112. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1005-0302(12)60004-8
- 39.Otsuki B, Takemoto M, Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Kokubo T, Nakamura T (2006) Pore throat size and connectivity determine bone and tissue ingrowth into porous implants: three-dimensional micro-CT based structural analyses of porous bioactive titanium implants. Biomaterials 27:5892–5900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.08.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Jones AC, Arns CH, Hutmacher DW, Milthorpe BK, Sheppard AP, Knackstedt MA (2009) The correlation of pore morphology, interconnectivity and physical properties of 3D ceramic scaffolds with bone ingrowth. Biomaterials 30:1440–1451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.10.056 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 41.Tsuruga E, Takita H, Itoh H, Wakisaka Y, Kuboki Y (1997) Pore size of porous hydroxyapatite as the cell-substratum controls BMP-induced osteogenesis. J Biochem 121:317–324. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jbchem.a021589 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 50.Raimondi MT, Boschetti F, Falcone L, Fiore GB, Remuzzi A, Marinoni E, Marazzi M, Pietrabissa R (2002) Mechanobiology of engineered cartilage cultured under a quantified fluid-dynamic environment. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 1:69–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-002-0007-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 53.Cardaropoli G, Araújo M, Hayacibara R, Sukekava F, Lindhe J (2005) Healing of extraction sockets and surgically produced-augmented and non-augmented-defects in the alveolar ridge. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 32:435–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00692.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar