Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine

, Volume 23, Issue 11, pp 2671–2678 | Cite as

Scaffolds for bone tissue engineering fabricated from two different materials by the rapid prototyping technique: PCL versus PLGA

  • So Hee Park
  • Dae Sung Park
  • Ji Won Shin
  • Yun Gyeong Kang
  • Hyung Keun Kim
  • Taek Rim Yoon
  • Jung-Woog Shin


Three dimensional tissue engineered scaffolds for the treatment of critical defect have been usually fabricated by salt leaching or gas forming technique. However, it is not easy for cells to penetrate the scaffolds due to the poor interconnectivity of pores. To overcome these current limitations we utilized a rapid prototyping (RP) technique for fabricating tissue engineered scaffolds to treat critical defects. The RP technique resulted in the uniform distribution and systematic connection of pores, which enabled cells to penetrate the scaffold. Two kinds of materials were used. They were poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) and poly(d, l-lactic-glycolic acid) (PLGA), where PCL is known to have longer degradation time than PLGA. In vitro tests supported the biocompatibility of the scaffolds. A 12-week animal study involving various examinations of rabbit tibias such as micro-CT and staining showed that both PCL and PLGA resulted in successful bone regeneration. As expected, PLGA degraded faster than PCL, and consequently the tissues generated in the PLGA group were less dense than those in the PCL group. We concluded that slower degradation is preferable in bone tissue engineering, especially when treating critical defects, as mechanical support is needed until full regeneration has occurred.


Polylactic Acid Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffold Material Critical Defect PLGA Scaffold 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by the grants of Technology Innovation Program (10038667, Ministry of Knowledge Economy, ROK) and Priority Research Centers Program (2010-0020224, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology).


  1. 1.
    Persidis A. Tissue engineering. Nat Biotechnol. 1999;17:508–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sachlos E, Czernuszka JT. Making tissue engineering scaffolds work review on the application of solid freeform fabrication technology to the production of tissue engineering scaffolds. Eur Cells Mater. 2009;5:29–40.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen G, Ushida T, Tateishi T. Scaffold design for tissue engineering. Macromol Biosci. 2002;2:67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pathiraja AG, Raju A. Biodegradable synthetic polymers for tissue engineering. Eur Cells Mater. 2003;5:1–16.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sabir MI, Xu X, Li L. A review on biodegradable polymeric materials for bone tissue engineering applications. J Mater Sci. 2009;44:5713–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nair LS, Laurencin CT. Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. Prog Polym Sci. 2007;32:762–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hutmacher DW. Scaffolds in tissue engineering bone and cartilage. Biomaterials. 2000;21:2529–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barbanti SH, Carvalho Zavaglia CA, de Rezende Duek EA. Effect of salt leaching on PCL and PLGA(50/50) resorbable scaffolds. Mater Res. 2008;11:75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mooney DJ, Baldwin DF, Suh NP, Vacanti JP, Langer R. Novel approach to fabricate porous sponges of poly(d,l lactic-co-glycolic acid) without the use of organic solvents. Biomaterials. 1996;17:1417–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris LD, Kim BS, Mooney DJ. Open pore biodegradable matrices formed with gas foaming. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;42:396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yun H, Kim S, Hyun Y, Heo S, Shin J. Three-dimensional mesoporous-giantporous inorganic/organic composite scaffolds for tissue engineering. Chem Mater. 2007;19:6363–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heo S, Kim S, Wei J, Kim DH, Hyun Y, Yun H, Kim HK, Yoon TR, Kim S, Park S, Shin JW, Shin J. In vitro and animal study of novel nano-hydroxyapatite/poly(ε-caprolactone) composite scaffolds fabricated by layer manufacturing process. Tissue Eng Part A. 2009;15:977–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Santis R, Gloria A, Russo T, D’Amora U, Zeppetelli S, Dionigi C, Sytcheva A, Herrmannsdörfer T, Dediu V, Ambrosio L. A basic approach toward the development of nanocomposite magnetic scaffolds for advanced bone tissue engineering. J Appl Polym Sci. 2010;122:3599–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim GH, Son JG. 3D polycarprolactone (PCL) scaffold with hierarchical structure fabricated by a piezoelectric transducer (PZT)-assisted bioplotter. Appl Phys A. 2009;94:781–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seyednejad H, Gawlitta D, Kuiper RV, Bruin A, Nostrum CF, Vermonden T, Dhert W, Hennink WE. In vivo biocompatibility and biodegradation of 3D-printed porous scaffolds based on a hydroxyl-functionalized poly(ε-caprolactone). Biomaterials. 2012;33:4309–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jia YT, Zhu XY, Liu QQ. In vitro degradation of electrospun fiber membranes of PCL/PVP blends. AMR. 2011;332–334:1330–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sun H, Mei L, Song C, Cui X, Wang P. The in vivo degradation, absorption and excretion of PCL-based implant. Biomaterials. 2006;27:1735–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim J, McBride S, Tellis B, Alvarez-Urena P, Song YH, Dean DD, Sylvia VL, Elgendy H, Ong J, Hollinger JO. Rapid-prototyped PLGA/β-TCP/hydroxyapatite nanocomposite scaffolds in a rabbit femoral defect model. Biofabrication. 2012;4:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baker SC, Rohman G, Southgate J, Cameron NR. The relationship between the mechanical properties and cell behaviour on PLGA and PCL scaffolds for bladder tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2009;30:1321–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hulbert SF, Morrison SJ, Klawitter JJ. Tissue reaction to three ceramics of porous and non-porous structures. J Biomed Mater Res. 1972;6:347–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Flatley TJ, Lynch KL, Benson M. Tissue response to implants of calcium phosphate ceramics in rabbit spine. Clin Orthop. 1983;179:246–52.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Slagada AJ, Coutinho OP, Reis RL. Bone tissue engineering: state of they are and future trends. Macromol Biosci. 2004;4:743–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yao J, Tao SL, Young MJ. Synthetic polymer scaffolds for stem cell transplantation in retinal tissue engineering. Polymers. 2011;3:899–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hoffmeister BK, Smith SR, Handley SM, Rho JY. Anisotropy of Young’s modulus of human tibial cortical bone. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2000;38:333–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rho JY, Ashman RB, Turner CH. Young’s modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech. 1993;26:111–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials. 2005;26:5474–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schieker M, Seitz H, Drosse I, Seitz S, Mutschler W. Biomaterials as scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Eur J Trauma. 2006;2:114–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • So Hee Park
    • 1
  • Dae Sung Park
    • 2
  • Ji Won Shin
    • 1
  • Yun Gyeong Kang
    • 1
  • Hyung Keun Kim
    • 3
  • Taek Rim Yoon
    • 2
  • Jung-Woog Shin
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringInje UniversityGimhaeKorea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedics SurgeryChonnam National University Hwasun HospitalHwasun-gunKorea
  3. 3.Heart Research Center of Chonnam National University HospitalGwangjuKorea
  4. 4.FIRST Research Team/Institute of Aged Life Redesign/Cardiovascular and Metabolic Disease Center/UHRCInje UniversityGimhaeKorea

Personalised recommendations