Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013:2013:458253.
doi: 10.1155/2013/458253. Epub 2013 Jul 29.

Development of composite scaffolds for load-bearing segmental bone defects

Affiliations
Review

Development of composite scaffolds for load-bearing segmental bone defects

Marcello Pilia et al. Biomed Res Int. 2013.

Abstract

The need for a suitable tissue-engineered scaffold that can be used to heal load-bearing segmental bone defects (SBDs) is both immediate and increasing. During the past 30 years, various ceramic and polymer scaffolds have been investigated for this application. More recently, while composite scaffolds built using a combination of ceramics and polymeric materials are being investigated in a greater number, very few products have progressed from laboratory benchtop studies to preclinical testing in animals. This review is based on an exhaustive literature search of various composite scaffolds designed to serve as bone regenerative therapies. We analyzed the benefits and drawbacks of different composite scaffold manufacturing techniques, the properties of commonly used ceramics and polymers, and the properties of currently investigated synthetic composite grafts. To follow, a comprehensive review of in vivo models used to test composite scaffolds in SBDs is detailed to serve as a guide to design appropriate translational studies and to identify the challenges that need to be overcome in scaffold design for successful translation. This includes selecting the animal type, determining the anatomical location within the animals, choosing the correct study duration, and finally, an overview of scaffold performance assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) Radiograph of open tibial fracture with segmental bone loss as a result of trauma injury. (b) Radiograph of the damaged tibia after intramedullary nail and internal fixation at the extremities. The defect is filled with cement spacer that had been previously impregnated with antibiotic. (c) Radiograph of the defect after 3 and (d) 4 months. Bone healing never occurred, and the fracture is considered a nonunion. Printed with permission from Dr. Steve Morgan [37].
Figure 2
Figure 2
Diagram showing material (top) and biological (bottom) properties of ultimate regenerative bone scaffolds. It is necessary for engineered scaffolds to have both of these properties to promote bone growth. One class of properties alone is not sufficient to promote bone growth in a timely manner. Data originated from [, , , , –42].

References

    1. Xu HHK, Weir MD, Simon CG. Injectable and strong nano-apatite scaffolds for cell/growth factor delivery and bone regeneration. Dental Materials. 2008;24(9):1212–1222. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Praemer A, Furner S, Rice DP. Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United Statesed. 1st edition. Park Ridge, Ill, USA: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1999.
    1. Ambrosio AM, Sahota JS, Khan Y, Laurencin CT. A novel amorphous calcium phosphate polymer ceramic for bone repair: I. Synthesis and characterization. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 2001;58:295–301. - PubMed
    1. Laurencin CT, Ambrosio AMA, Borden MD, Cooper JA., Jr. Tissue engineering: orthopedic applications. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering. 1999;(1):19–46. - PubMed
    1. Chim H, Hutmacher DW, Chou AM, et al. A comparative analysis of scaffold material modifications for load-bearing applications in bone tissue engineering. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2006;35(10):928–934. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances