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
. 2024 Dec 13;17(24):6092.
doi: 10.3390/ma17246092.

Three-Dimensionally Printed Bionic Hydroxyapatite (HAp) Ceramic Scaffolds with Different Structures and Porosities: Strength, Biocompatibility, and Biomedical Application Potential

Peng Zhang  1   2 , Qing Zhou  2 , Rujie He  2
Affiliations

Three-Dimensionally Printed Bionic Hydroxyapatite (HAp) Ceramic Scaffolds with Different Structures and Porosities: Strength, Biocompatibility, and Biomedical Application Potential

Peng Zhang et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

Bionic bioceramic scaffolds are essential for achieving excellent implant properties and biocompatible behavior. In this study, inspired by the microstructure of natural bone, bionic hydroxyapatite (HAp) ceramic scaffolds with different structures (body-centered cubic (BCC), face-centered cubic (FCC), and gyroid Triply Periodic Minimal Surfaces (TPMSs)) and porosities (80 vol.%, 60 vol.%, and 40 vol.%) were designed, 3D-printed, and characterized. The effects of structure and porosity on the morphology, mechanical properties, and in vitro biocompatibility properties of the HAp scaffolds were studied and compared with each other. Interestingly, the HAp scaffold with a porosity of 80 vol.% and a TPMS structure had the best combination of compressive strength and in vitro biocompatibility, and demonstrated a great biomedical application potential for bone repair. We hope this study can provide a reference for the application and development of HAp scaffolds in the field of bone repair engineering.

Keywords: 3D printing; biocompatibility; hydroxyapatite; mechanical properties; scaffold.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bionic design of HAp scaffolds with different structures and porosities.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Design and flow chart of this study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Photographs and high-magnification microstructures of 3D-printed HAp BCC scaffolds with different porosities: (a–c) B80; (d–f) B60; (g–i) B40.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Photographs and high-magnification microstructures of 3D-printed HAp FCC scaffolds with different porosities: (a–c) F80; (d–f) F60; (g–i) F40.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Photographs and high-magnification microstructures of 3D-printed HAp TPMS scaffolds with different porosities: (a–c) T80; (d–f) T60; (g–i) T40.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Compressive strength of 3D-printed HAp scaffolds with different porosities: (a,b) 80 vol.%; (c,d) 60 vol.%; (e,f) 40 vol.%. These graphs show that TPMS structures have the highest compressive strength.
Figure 7
Figure 7
CCK-8 cell viability assay for 3D-printed HAp scaffolds with different structures and porosities: (a) 1 day; (b) 4 days; (c) 7 days. (Note: asterisk indicates a statistically significant difference between the two groups; N: no statistically significant difference; ***: p < 0.001; ****: p < 0.0001.)
Figure 8
Figure 8
Fluorescence images of live/dead cell staining on various 3D-printed HAp scaffolds: (a) B80; (b) F80; (c) T80; (d) B60; (e) F60; (f) T60.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Expression of cellular alkaline phosphatase activity on days (a) 1, (b) 4, and (c) 7 (Note: asterisk indicates statistical differences between the two groups; N: no statistically significant difference; *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.001).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Effects of porosity on cellular alkaline phosphatase activity of 3D-printed HAp scaffolds.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Alonzo A., Primo F.A., Kumar S.A., Mudloff J.A., Dominguez E., Fregoso G., Oritz N., Weiss W.M., Jaddar B. Bone tissue engineering techniques, advances, and scaffolds for treatment of bone defects. Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng. 2021;17:100248. doi: 10.1016/j.cobme.2020.100248. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li J., Han F., Ma J., Wang H., Pan J., Yang G., Zhao H., Zhao J., Liu J., Liu Z., et al. Targeting endogenous hydrogen peroxide at bone defects promotes bone repair. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2022;32:2111208. doi: 10.1002/adfm.202111208. - DOI
    1. Wu J., Zhang Y., Lyu Y., Cheng L. On the various numerical techniques for the optimization of bone scaffold. Materials. 2023;16:974. doi: 10.3390/ma16030974. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shi J., Dai W., Gupta A., Zhang B., Wu Z., Zhang Y., Pan L., Wang L. Frontiers of hydroxyapatite cmposites in bonic bne tssue egineering. Materials. 2022;15:8475. doi: 10.3390/ma15238475. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lv X., Wang S., Xu Z., Liu X., Liu G., Cao F., Ma Y. Structural mehanical poperties of 3D pinting bomimetic bone replacement materials. Biomimetics. 2023;8:166. doi: 10.3390/biomimetics8020166. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources