Microstructural and biological characterization of 3D printed PEEK scaffolds coated with alginate/CNT for bone regeneration applications

被引：0

作者：

Afshin Fatemi ^{[1
]}

Farid Reza Biglari ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, 424 Hafez Ave., Tehran

来源：

Discover Mechanical Engineering | / 3卷 / 1期

关键词：

3D printing; Alginate; Bioactivity; Biocompatibility; Carbon nanotubes (CNT); Polyether ether ketone; Scaffold architecture;

D O I：

10.1007/s44245-024-00070-7

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

The main aim of bone tissue engineering is to develop novel scaffold structures that integrate biological functionality with sufficient mechanical strength and properties. In this study, bone scaffolds were fabricated using polyether ether ketone (PEEK) via 3D printing, resulting in three different porous designs. To enhance their biological attributes, these scaffolds were coated with an alginate and carbon nanotube (CNT) composite using a freeze-drying technique. The biological characteristics of fabricated samples, such as biocompatibility and bioactivity, were evaluated in simulated body fluid (SBF). Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) analysis showed that the 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds had a porous, uniform, and interconnected architecture with pore sizes between 321–378 µm. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) confirmed the formation of hydroxyapatite (HA) and bioactive calcium phosphate (Ca-P) on the scaffold surfaces, indicating their bioactivity. Cell biocompatibility was assessed using the MTT assay, which revealed a high cell viability rate of approximately 97% and no significant toxicity. Consequently, the 3D-printed PEEK scaffold coated with Alginate/0.3%wt CNT demonstrated promising microstructure, bioactivity, and biocompatibility, making it suitable for bone tissue regeneration. Graphical abstract: (Figure presented.) © The Author(s) 2024.

引用

共 19 条

[1]

Wubneh A., Tsekoura E.K., Ayranci C., Uludag H., Current state of fabrication technologies and materials for bone tissue engineering, Acta Biomater, 80, pp. 1-30, (2018)

[2]

Salgado A.J., Coutinho O.P., Reis R.L., Bone tissue engineering: state of the art and future trends, Macromol Biosci, 4, pp. 743-765, (2004)

[3]

Porter J.R., Ruckh T.T., Popat K.C., Bone tissue engineering: a review in bone biomimetics and drug delivery strategies, Biotechnol Prog, 25, pp. 1539-1560, (2009)

[4]

Henkel J., Woodruff M.A., Et al., Bone regeneration based on tissue engineering conceptions—a 21st century perspective, Bone Res, 1, pp. 216-248, (2013)

[5]

Chan B.P., Leong K.W., Scaffolding in tissue engineering: general approaches and tissue-specific considerations, Eur Spine J, 17, pp. 467-479, (2008)

[6]

Sawyer A.A., Weeks D.M., Et al., The effect of the addition of a polyglutamate motif to RGD on peptide tethering to hydroxyapatite and the promotion of mesenchymal stem cell adhesion, Biomaterials, 26, pp. 7046-7056, (2005)

[7]

Dhandayuthapani B., Yoshida Y., Maekawa T., Sakthi K.D., Polymeric scaffolds in tissue engineering application: a review, Int J Polymer Sci, 2011, 1, (2011)

[8]

Roseti L., Parisi V., Et al., Scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: state of the art and new perspectives, Mater Sci Eng C, 78, pp. 1246-1262, (2017)

[9]

Foroutan S., Et al., A porous sodium alginate-casio3 polymer reinforced with graphene nanosheet: fabrication and optimality analysis, Fiber Polym, 22, pp. 540-549, (2021)

[10]

Wu S., Liu X., Et al., Biomimetic porous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering, Mater Sci Eng R Rep, 80, pp. 1-36, (2014)

← 1 2 →