Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of Silicon Dioxide and Magnesium Oxide on the Printability, Degradability, Mechanical Strength and Bioactivity of 3D Printed Poly (Lactic Acid)-Tricalcium Phosphate Composite Scaffolds

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Aims and scope

Abstract

Background:

Poly (lactic acid) (PLA) is a biodegradable polyester that has been exploited for a variety of biomedical applications, including tissue engineering. The incorporation of β-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) into PLA has imparted bioactivity to the polymeric matrix.

Methods:

We have modified a 90%PLA-10%TCP composite with SiO2 and MgO (1, 5 and 10 wt%), separately, to further enhance the material bioactivity. Filaments were prepared by extrusion, and scaffolds were fabricated using 3D printing technology associated with fused filament fabrication.

Results:

The PLA-TCP-SiO2 composites presented similar structural, thermal, and rheological properties to control PLA and PLA-TCP. In contrast, the PLA-TCP-MgO composites displayed absence of crystallinity, lower polymeric molecular weight, accelerated degradation ratio, and decreased viscosity within the 3D printing shear rate range. SiO2 and MgO particles were homogeneously dispersed within the PLA and their incorporation increased the roughness and protein adsorption of the scaffold, compared to a PLA-TCP scaffold. This favorable surface modification promoted cell proliferation, suggesting that SiO2 and MgO may have potential for enhancing the bio-integration of scaffolds in tissue engineering applications. However, high loads of MgO accelerated the polymeric degradation, leading to an acid environment that imparted the composite biocompatibility. The presence of SiO2 stimulated mesenchymal stem cells differentiation towards osteoblast; enhancing extracellular matrix mineralization, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, and bone-related genes expression.

Conclusion:

The PLA-10%TCP-10%SiO2 composite presented the most promising results, especially for bone tissue regeneration, due to its intense osteogenic behavior. PLA-10%TCP-10%SiO2 could be used as an alternative implant for bone tissue engineering application.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Scheme 1
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from all the authors.

References

  1. Chou YC, Lee D, Chang TM, Hsu YH, Yu YH, Liu SJ, et al. Development of a three-dimensional (3D) printed biodegradable cage to convert morselized corticocancellous bone chips into a structured cortical bone graft. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:e595.

  2. Radwan-Pragłowska J, Janus Ł, Piątkowski M, Bogdał D, Matýsek D. Hybrid bilayer PLA/chitosan nanofibrous scaffolds doped with ZnO, Fe3O4, and Au nanoparticles with bioactive properties for skin tissue engineering. Polymers. 2020;12:e159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Haaparanta AM, Järvinen E, Cengiz IF, Ellä V, Kokkonen HT, Kiviranta I, et al. Preparation and characterization of collagen/PLA, chitosan/PLA, and collagen/chitosan/PLA hybrid scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25:1129–36.

  4. Nakayama KH, Shayan M, Huang NF. Engineering biomimetic materials for skeletal muscle repair and regeneration. Adv Healthc Mater. 2019;8:e1801168.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Araque-Monrós MC, García-Cruz DM, Escobar-Ivirico JL, Gil-Santos L, Monleón-Pradas M, Más-Estellés J. Regenerative and resorbable PLA/HA hybrid construct for tendon/ligament tissue engineering. Ann Biomed Eng. 2020;48:757–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Naseri-Nosar M, Salehi M, Hojjati-Emami S. Cellulose acetate/poly lactic acid coaxial wet-electrospun scaffold containing citalopram-loaded gelatin nanocarriers for neural tissue engineering applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2017;103:701–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gugutkov D, Gustavsson J, Cantini M, Salmeron-Sánchez M, Altankov G. Electrospun fibrinogen-PLA nanofibres for vascular tissue engineering. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2017;11:2774–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kang Y, Wang C, Qiao Y, Gu J, Zhang H, Peijs T, et al. Tissue-engineered trachea consisting of electrospun patterned Sc-PLA/GO- G-IL fibrous membranes with antibacterial property and 3D-printed skeletons with elasticity. Biomacromol. 2019;20:1765–76.

  9. Zhang H, Mao X, Zhao D, Jiang W, Du Z, Li Q, et al. Three dimensional printed polylactic acid-hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for prefabricating vascularized tissue engineered bone: an in vivo bioreactor model. Sci Rep. 2017;7:e15255.

  10. Orafa Z, Irani S, Zamanian A, Bakhshi H, Nikukar H, Ghalandari B. Coating of laponite on PLA nanofibrous for bone tissue engineering application. Macromol Res. 2021;29:191–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Backes EH, LdeN P, Selistre-de-Araujo HS, Costa LC, Passador FR, Pessan LA. Development and characterization of printable PLA/Β-TCP bioactive composites for bone tissue applications. J Appl Polym Sci. 2020;138:e49759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Backes EH, LdeN P, Beatrice CAG, Costa LC, Passador FR, Pessan LA. Fabrication of biocompatible composites of poly(lactic acid)/hydroxyapatite envisioning medical applications. Polym Eng Sci. 2020;60:636–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Backes EH, Fernandes EM, Diogo GS, Marques CF, Silva TH, Costa LC, et al. Engineering 3D printed bioactive composite scaffolds based on the combination of aliphatic polyester and calcium phosphates for bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C. 2021;122:e111928.

  14. Wang W, Zhang B, Li M, Li J, Zhang C, Han Y, et al. 3D Printing of PLA/N-HA composite scaffolds with customized mechanical properties and biological functions for bone tissue engineering. Compos B Eng. 2021;224:e109192.

  15. Hickey DJ, Ercan B, Sun L, Webster TJ. Adding MgO nanoparticles to hydroxyapatite–PLLA nanocomposites for improved bone tissue engineering applications. Acta Biomater. 2015;14:175–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang S, Wang X, Draenert FG, Albert O, Schröder HC, Mailänder V, et al. Bioactive and biodegradable silica biomaterial for bone regeneration. Bone. 2014;67:292–304.

  17. Huang B. Carbon nanotubes and their polymeric composites: the applications in tissue engineering. Biomanuf Rev. 2020;5:e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sergi R, Bellucci D, Cannillo V. A review of bioactive glass/natural polymer composites: state of the art. Materials. 2020;13:e5560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhai X, Ma Y, Hou C, Gao F, Zhang Y, Ruan C, et al. 3D-printed high strength bioactive supramolecular polymer/clay nanocomposite hydrogel scaffold for bone regeneration. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2017;3:1109–18.

  20. Ren X, Zhao M, Lash B, Martino MM, Julier Z. Growth factor engineering strategies for regenerative medicine applications. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020;7:e469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Castelletto V, Gouveia RJ, Connon CJ, Hamley IW. Self-assembly and bioactivity of a polymer/peptide conjugate containing the RGD cell adhesion motif and PEG. Eur Polym J. 2013;49:2961–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Nie X, Sun X, Wang C, Yang J. Effect of magnesium ions/type I collagen promote the biological behavior of osteoblasts and its mechanism. Regen Biomater. 2020;7:53–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhao Y, Liu B, You C, Chen M. Effects of MgO whiskers on mechanical properties and crystallization behavior of PLLA/MgO composites. Mater Des. 2016;89:573–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Roh HS, Lee CM, Hwang YH, Kook MS, Yang SW, Lee D, et al. Addition of MgO nanoparticles and plasma surface treatment of three-dimensional printed polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffolds for improving bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;74:525–35.

  25. Pascual-González C, Thompson C, Jdela V, Churruca NB, Fernández-Blázquez JP, Lizarralde I, et al. Processing and properties of PLA/Mg filaments for 3D printing of scaffolds for biomedical applications. Rapid Prototyp J. 2021;28:884–94.

  26. Swetha S, Balagangadharan K, Lavanya K, Selvamurugan N. Three-dimensional-poly(lactic acid) scaffolds coated with gelatin/magnesium-doped nano-hydroxyapatite for bone tissue engineering. Biotechnol J. 2021;16:e2100282.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Brown A, Zaky S, RaySfeir HC Jr. Porous magnesium/PLGA composite scaffolds for enhanced bone regeneration following tooth extraction. Acta Biomater. 2015;11:543–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoppe A, Güldal NS, Boccaccini AR. A review of the biological response to ionic dissolution products from bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. Biomaterials. 2011;32:2757–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tang L, Cheng J. Nonporous silica nanoparticles for nanomedicine application. Nano Today. 2013;8:290–312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Valliant EM, Romer F, Wang D, McPhail DS, Smith ME, Hanna JV, et al. Bioactivity in silica/poly(c-glutamic acid) sol–gel hybrids through calcium chelation. Acta Biomater. 2013;9:7662–71.

  31. Catauro M, Bollino F, Papale F. Surface modifications of titanium implants by coating with bioactive and biocompatible poly (ε-caprolactone)/SiO2 hybrids synthesized via sol-gel. Arab J Chem. 2018;11:1126–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sachot N, Castano O, Mateos-Timoneda MA, Engel E, Planell JA. Hierarchically engineered fibrous scaffolds for bone regeneration. J R Soc Interface. 2013;10:e20130684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Yang X, Li Y, Liu X, Huang Q, Zhang R, Feng Q. Incorporation of silica nanoparticles to PLGA electrospun fibers for osteogenic differentiation of human osteoblast-like cells. Regen Biomater. 2018;5:229–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Shi M, Zhou Y, Shao J, Chen Z, Song B, Chang J, et al. Stimulation of osteogenesis and angiogenesis of HBMSCS by delivering Si ions and functional drug from mesoporous silica nanospheres. Acta Biomater. 2015;21:178–89.

  35. Yang X, Li Y, Liu X, Huang Q, He W, Zhang R, et al. The stimulatory effect of silica nanoparticles on osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. Biomed Mater. 2017;12:e015001.

  36. Ha S, Weitzmann MN, Beck GR. Bioactive silica nanoparticles promote osteoblast differentiation through stimulation of autophagy and direct association with LC3 and p62. ACS Nano. 2014;8:5898–910.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Mladenovic Z, Johansson A, Willman B, Shahabi K, Björn E, Ransjö M. Soluble silica inhibits osteoclast formation and bone resorption in vitro. Acta Biomater. 2014;10:406–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chen X, Chen G, Wang G, Zhu P, Gao C. Recent progress on 3D-printed polylactic acid and its applications in bone repair. Adv Eng Mater. 2020;22:e1901065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Attaran M. The rise of 3-D printing: the advantages of additive manufacturing over traditional manufacturing. Bus Horiz. 2017;60:677–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Santos LG, Costa LC, Pessan LA. Development of biodegradable PLA/PBT nanoblends. J Appl Polym Sci. 2017;135:e45951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Li Y, Li Q, Yang G, Ming R, Yu M, Zhang H, et al. Evaluation of thermal resistance and mechanical properties of injected molded stereocomplex of poly(L-lactic acid) and poly(D-lactic acid) with various molecular weights. Adv Polym Technol. 2018;37:1674–81.

  42. McIlroy C, Olmsted PD. Disentanglement effects on welding behaviour of polymer melts during the fused-filament-fabrication method for additive manufacturing. Polymer. 2017;123:376–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Costa SF, Duarte FM, Covas JA. Estimation of filament temperature and adhesion development in fused deposition techniques. J Mater Process Technol. 2017;245:167–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sanchez LC, Beatrice CAG, Lotti C, Marini J, Bettini SHP, Costa LC. Rheological approach for an additive manufacturing printer based on material extrusion. J Adv Manuf Technol. 2019;105:2403–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Backes EH, Beatrice CAG, Shimomura KMB, Harb SV, Pachane BC, Selestre-de-Araujo HS, et al. Development of poly(ε-polycaprolactone)/hydroxyapatite composites for bone tissue regeneration. J Mater Res. 2021;36:3050–62.

  46. Beatrice CAG, Shimomura KMB, Backes EH, Harb SV, Costa LC, Passador FR, et al. Engineering printable composites of poly(ɛ-polycaprolactone)/β-tricalcium phosphate for biomedical applications. Polym Compos. 2021;42:1198–213.

  47. Nofar M, Salehiyan R, Ray SS. Rheology of poly (lactic acid)-based systems. Polym Rev. 2019;59:465–509.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Denry I, Kuhn LT. Design and characterization of calcium phosphate ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Dent Mater. 2016;32:43–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kumar A, Mandal S, Barui S, Vasireddi R, Gbureck U, Gelinsky M, et al. Low temperature additive manufacturing of three dimensional scaffolds for bone-tissue engineering applications: processing related challenges and property assessment. Mater Sci Eng R Rep. 2016;103:1–39.

  50. Dorozhkin SV. Bioceramics of calcium orthophosphates. Biomaterials. 2010;31:1465–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Rogowska-Tylman J, Locs J, Salma I, Woźniak B, Pilmane M, Zalite V, et al. In vivo and in vitro study of a novel nanohydroxyapatite sonocoated scaffolds for enhanced bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019;99:669–84.

  52. Backes EH, Harb SV, Beatrice CAG, Shimomura KMB, Passador FR, Costa LC, et al. Polycaprolactone usage in additive manufacturing strategies for tissue engineering applications: a review. J Biomed Mater Res. 2022;110:1479–503.

  53. Zheng Y, Han Q, Li D, Sheng F, Song Z, Wang J. Promotion of tendon growth into implant through pore-size design of a Ti-6Al-4 V porous scaffold prepared by 3D printing. Mater Des. 2021;197:e109219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Zhang H, Pei Z, Wang C, Li M, Zhang H, Qu J. Electrohydrodynamic 3D printing scaffolds for repair of achilles tendon defect in rats. Tissue Eng Part A. 2021;27:1343–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kosorn W, Sakulsumbat M, Uppanan P, Kaewkong P, Chantaweroad S, Jitsaard J, et al. PCL/PHBV blended three dimensional scaffolds fabricated by fused deposition modeling and responses of chondrocytes to the scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res Part B. 2017;105:1141–50.

  56. Guimarães CF, Gasperini L, Marques AP, Reis RL. The stiffness of living tissues and its implications for tissue engineering. Nat Rev Mater. 2020;5:351–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Hutmacher DW, Schantz JT, Lam CXF, Tan KC, Lim TC. State of the art and future directions of scaffold-based bone engineering from a biomaterials perspective. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1:245–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Rosales-Leal JI, Rodríguez-Valverde MA, Mazzaglia G, Ramón-Torregrosa PJ, Díaz-Rodríguez L, García-Martínez O, et al. Effect of roughness, wettability and morphology of engineered titanium surfaces on osteoblast-like cell adhesion. Colloid Surf A. 2010;365:222–9.

  59. Bagherifard S, Hickey DJ, de Luca AC, Malheiro VN, Markaki AE, Guagliano M, et al. The influence of nanostructured features on bacterial adhesion and bone cell functions on severely shot peened 316L stainless steel. Biomaterials. 2015;73:185–97.

  60. Harb SV, Bassous NJ, de Souza TAC, Trentin A, Pulcinelli SH, Santilli CV, et al. Hydroxyapatite and β-TCP modified PMMA-TiO2 and PMMA-ZrO2 coatings for bioactive corrosion protection of Ti6Al4V implants. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;116:111149.

  61. Harb SV, Uvida MC, Trentin A, Lobo AO, Webster TJ, Pulcinelli SH, et al. PMMA-Silica nanocomposite coating: effective corrosion protection and biocompatibility for a Ti6Al4V alloy. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;110:110713.

  62. Shasteen C, Choy YB. Controlling degradation rate of poly(lactic acid) for its biomedical applications. Biomed Eng Lett. 2011;1:e163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Xiao L, Wang B, Yang G, Gauthier M. Poly(lactic acid)-based biomaterials: synthesis, modification and applications. biomedical science, engineering and technology, in: D.N. Ghista (Ed.), Biomedical Science, Engineering and Technology, Intechopen, London, 2012, pp. 247–282.

  64. Samadian H, Farzamfar S, Vaez A, Ehterami A, Bit A, Alam M, et al. A tailored polylactic acid/polycaprolactone biodegradable and bioactive 3D porous scaffold containing gelatin nanofibers and taurine for bone regeneration. Sci Rep. 2020;10:e13366.

  65. Murariu M, Dubois P. PLA composites: from production to properties. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;107:17–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Siqueira IAWB, Amaral SS, de Moura NK, Machado JPB, Backes EH, Passador FR, et al. In vitro bioactivity and biological assays of porous membranes of the poly(lactic acid) containing calcium silicate fibers. Polym Bull. 2020;77:5357–71.

  67. Chen X, Gao C, Jiang J, Wu Y, Zhu P, Chen G. 3D printed porous PLA/nHA composite scaffolds with enhanced osteogenesis and osteoconductivity in vivo for bone regeneration. Biomed Mater. 2019;14:e065003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Marra A, Cimmino S, Silvestre C. Effect of TiO2 and ZnO on PLA degradation in various media. Adv Mater Sci. 2017;2:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Narayanan G, Vernekar VN, Kuyinu EL, Laurencin CT. Poly(lactic acid)-based biomaterials for orthopaedic regenerative engineering. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;107:247–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Shuai C, Li Y, Feng P, Guo W, Yang W, Peng S. Positive feedback effects of mg on the hydrolysis of poly-l-lactic acid (PLLA): promoted degradation of PLLA scaffolds. Polym Test. 2018;68:27–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Bakhshi R, Mohammadi-Zerankeshi M, Mehrabi-Dehdezi M, Alizadeh R, Labbaf S, Abachi P. Additive manufacturing of PLA-Mg composite scaffolds for hard tissue engineering applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2023;138:105655.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Nilawar S, Chatterjee K. Surface decoration of redox-modulating nanoceria on 3D-printed tissue scaffolds promotes stem cell osteogenesis and attenuates bacterial colonization. Biomacromol. 2022;23:226–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Dong L, Wang SJ, Zhao XR, Zhu YF, Yu JK. 3D- printed poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffold integrated with cell-laden chitosan hydrogels for bone tissue engineering. Sci Rep. 2017;7:13412.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Craig Neal for the scientific contribution, and to the Laboratory of Structural Characterization (LCE/DEMa/UFSCar) for SEM-EDS and AFM facilities. This study was financed by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) [grant numbers 2021/11538-8, 2018/26060-3, 2019/27415-2, 2017/09609-9, and 2017/11366-7], Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001 [grant numbers 88887.485864/2020-00 and 88887.512147/2020-00), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) [grant number 306835/2017-7], and the UCF Preeminent Postdoctoral Program (P3) [E.K. grant].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Materials Engineering (DEMa), Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, SP, 13565-905, Brazil

    Samarah V. Harb, Eduardo H. Backes, Cesar A. G. Beatrice, Lidiane C. Costa & Luiz Antonio Pessan

  2. Advanced Materials Processing and Analysis Center, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Samarah V. Harb, Elayaraja Kolanthai & Sudipta Seal

  3. Department of Materials Engineering (DEMa), Graduate Program in Materials Science and Engineering, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, SP, 13565-905, Brazil

    Leonardo A. Pinto

  4. Department of Physiological Sciences, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, SP, 13565-905, Brazil

    Ana Carolina C. Nunes & Heloisa S. Selistre-de-Araújo

  5. Biionix Cluster, College of Medicine, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Sudipta Seal

Authors
  1. Samarah V. Harb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elayaraja Kolanthai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eduardo H. Backes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cesar A. G. Beatrice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Leonardo A. Pinto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ana Carolina C. Nunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Heloisa S. Selistre-de-Araújo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lidiane C. Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sudipta Seal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Luiz Antonio Pessan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samarah V. Harb.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Harb, S.V., Kolanthai, E., Backes, E.H. et al. Effect of Silicon Dioxide and Magnesium Oxide on the Printability, Degradability, Mechanical Strength and Bioactivity of 3D Printed Poly (Lactic Acid)-Tricalcium Phosphate Composite Scaffolds. Tissue Eng Regen Med 21, 223–242 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-023-00584-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-023-00584-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation