| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Tovar, Nick
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (14/14 displayed)
- 20233D Printing Type 1 Bovine Collagen Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications—Physicochemical Characterization and In Vitro Evaluationcitations
- 2023Engineering 3D Printed Bioceramic Scaffolds to Reconstruct Critical-Sized Calvaria Defects in a Skeletally Immature Pig Modelcitations
- 2022Residual stress estimated by nanoindentation in pontics and abutments of veneered zirconia fixed dental prosthesescitations
- 2022Physiochemical and bactericidal activity evaluationcitations
- 2021Three-Dimensionally-Printed Bioactive Ceramic Scaffoldscitations
- 2021Effect of supplemental acid-etching on the early stages of osseointegrationcitations
- 2020Assessing osseointegration of metallic implants with boronized surface treatmentcitations
- 2019Synergistic effects of implant macrogeometry and surface physicochemical modifications on osseointegrationcitations
- 2019Repair of Critical-Sized Long Bone Defects Using Dipyridamole-Augmented 3D-Printed Bioactive Ceramic Scaffoldscitations
- 2018Form and functional repair of long bone using 3D-printed bioactive scaffoldscitations
- 2014The physicochemical characterization and in vivo response of micro/nanoporous bioactive ceramic particulate bone graft materialscitations
- 2014The in vivo effect of P-15 coating on early osseointegrationcitations
- 2014Nanometer-scale features on micrometer-scale surface texturingcitations
- 2012Physicochemical characterization and in vivo evaluation of amorphous and partially crystalline calcium phosphate coatings fabricated on Ti-6Al-4V implants by the plasma spray methodcitations
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
Three-Dimensionally-Printed Bioactive Ceramic Scaffolds
Abstract
<p>BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The utilization of three-dimensionally (3D)-printed bioceramic scaffolds composed of beta-tricalcium phosphate in conjunction with dipyridamole have shown to be effective in the osteogenesis of critical bone defects in both skeletally immature and mature animals. Furthermore, previous studies have proven the dura and pericranium's osteogenic capacity in the presence of 3D-printed scaffolds; however, the effect galea aponeurotica on osteogenesis in the presence of 3D scaffolds remains unclear. METHOD/DESCRIPTION: Critical-sized (11 mm) bilateral calvarial defects were created in 35-day old rabbits (n = 7). Two different 3D scaffolds were created, with one side of the calvaria being treated with a solid nonporous cap and the other with a fully porous cap. The solid cap feature was designed with the intention of preventing communication of the galea and the ossification site, while the porous cap permitted such communication. The rabbits were euthanized 8 weeks postoperatively. Calvaria were analyzed using microcomputed tomography, 3D reconstruction, and nondecalcified histologic sectioning in order assess differences in bone growth between the two types of scaffolding. RESULTS: Scaffolds with the solid (nonporous) cap yielded greater percent bone volume (P = 0.012) as well as a greater percent potential bone (P = 0.001) compared with the scaffolds with a porous cap. The scaffolds with porous caps also exhibited a greater percent volume of soft tissue (P < 0.001) presence. There were no statistically significant differences detected in scaffold volume. CONCLUSION: A physical barrier preventing the interaction of the galea aponeurotica with the scaffold leads to significantly increased calvarial bone regeneration in comparison with the scaffolds allowing for this interaction. The galea's interaction also leads to more soft tissue growth hindering the in growth of bone in the porous-cap scaffolds.</p>