Skip to main content

Structural Biomimetic Scaffold Modifications for Bones

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
IRC-SET 2018
  • 350 Accesses

Abstract

Over the years, biomimetic scaffolds have been commonly used in the process of tissue regeneration for treatment of bone defects. Even though current biomimetic scaffolds are easily accessible, they lack mechanical strength for ideal applications. This research aims to improve on current designs to create new three-dimensional biomimetic scaffolds for bones. Different biomimetic scaffolds were designed and 3D-printed and was tested for mechanical strength conducting a tensile strength test on the scaffolds. The tests show that the scaffold with hexagonal pores proved to be the most effective scaffold due to its geometrical properties which allows it to withstand more pressure. This was concluded according to the spread of pressure along the scaffold that is dependent on the amount of pressure exerted, and the identification of first fracture which affects the line of breakage across the entire scaffold. This research is able to better help extend the field of tissue engineering and the applicability of 3D biomimetic bone scaffolds for clinical usage.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kheirallah, M., & Almeshaly, H. (2016). Bone graft substitutes for bone defect regeneration. A collective review. International Journal of Dentistry and Oral Science, 3(5), 247–257.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Albert, A., Leemrijse, T., Druez, V., Delloye, C., & Cornu, O. (2006). Are bone autografts still necessary in 2006? A three-year retrospective study of bone grafting. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, 72(6), 734.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. O’brien, F. J. (2011). Biomaterials & scaffolds for tissue engineering. Materials Today, 14(3), 88–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Torkzadeh, R. A. (2010). Accidents happen but who’s going to pay the bills?: A consumers guide to the california personal injury and wrongful death system. Cork: BookBaby.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bhatnagar, R. S., & Li, S. (2004, September). Biomimetic scaffolds for tissue engineering. In: 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE (Vol. 2, pp. 5021–5023). IEMBS’04. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2004. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yang, S., Leong, K. F., Du, Z., & Chua, C. K. (2001). The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. Part I. Traditional factors. Tissue Engineering, 7(6), 679–689.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. 3D Printing Systems Australia. (2017). Retrieved January 31, 2017, from http://3dprintingsystems.com/products/filament/.

  8. Chan, B. P., & Leong, K. W. (2008). Scaffolding in tissue engineering: General approaches and tissue-specific considerations. European Spine Journal, 17(4), 467–479.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ju, J., Summers, J. D., Ziegert, J., & Fadel, G. (2010, January). Compliant hexagonal meso-structures having both high shear strength and high shear strain. In: Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Egan, P., Ferguson, S., & Shea, K. (2017). Design of hierarchical 3D printed scaffolds considering mechanical and biological factors for bone tissue engineering. Journal of Mechanical Design, 139. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036396.

  11. Miranda, P., Pajares, A., Saiz, E., Tomsia, A. P., & Guiberteau, F. (2007). Fracture modes under uniaxial compression in hydroxyapatite scaffolds fabricated by robocasting. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part A, 83(3), 646–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tozzi, G., De Mori, A., Oliveira, A., & Roldo, M. (2016). Composite hydrogels for bone regeneration. Materials, 9(4), 267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Mr Teo Tee Wei from National Junior College for his patient guidance throughout the research process of this project. It is also greatly appreciated with gratitude towards National Junior College for the provision of the opportunity to engage in scientific research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jing Wen Nicole Sze .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Ho, X.Y.A., Lee, H.Y.C., Sze, J.W.N., Teo, T.W. (2019). Structural Biomimetic Scaffold Modifications for Bones. In: Guo, H., Ren, H., Bandla, A. (eds) IRC-SET 2018. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9828-6_32

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics