Version 1
: Received: 8 May 2024 / Approved: 9 May 2024 / Online: 9 May 2024 (09:15:59 CEST)
How to cite:
Zöller, T.; Schmal, H.; Ahlhelm, M.; Mayr, H. O.; Seidenstuecker, M. Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants. Preprints2024, 2024050547. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0547.v1
Zöller, T.; Schmal, H.; Ahlhelm, M.; Mayr, H. O.; Seidenstuecker, M. Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants. Preprints 2024, 2024050547. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0547.v1
Zöller, T.; Schmal, H.; Ahlhelm, M.; Mayr, H. O.; Seidenstuecker, M. Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants. Preprints2024, 2024050547. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0547.v1
APA Style
Zöller, T., Schmal, H., Ahlhelm, M., Mayr, H. O., & Seidenstuecker, M. (2024). Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0547.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Zöller, T., Hermann O Mayr and Michael Seidenstuecker. 2024 "Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0547.v1
Abstract
The aim of the study was the comparison of conventional sintering versus additive manufacturing techniques for β-TCP bioceramics, focusing on mechanical properties and biocompatibility. A "critical" bone defect requires surgical intervention beyond simple stabilization. Autologous bone grafting is the gold standard treatment for such defects but it has its limitations. Alloplastic bone grafting using synthetic materials is becoming increasingly popular. The use of bone graft substitutes has increased significantly and current research was focused on optimizing these substitutes, whereas this study compares two existing manufacturing techniques and the thereby produced β-TCP implants. The 3D-printed β-TCP hybrid structure implant was fabricated using two components, a column structure and a freeze-foam, which were sintered together. The conventionally manufactured ceramics were made by pouring. Both scaffolds were characterized according to porosity, mechanical properties and biocompatibility. The hybrid structure had a total porosity of 74.4 ± 0.5%. Microporous β-TCP implants had a porosity of 43.5 ± 2.4%, while macroporous β-TCP implants had a porosity of 61.81%. Mechanical testing revealed that the hybrid structure had a compressive strength of 10.4 ± 6 MPa, significantly lower than the microporous β-TCP implant’s with 32.9 ± 8.7 MPa. Biocompatibility evaluations showed a steady increase in cell proliferation over time for all β-TCP implants, with minimal cytotoxicity. This study provides valuable insight into the potential of additive manufacturing for β-TCP bioceramics in the treatment of bone defects.
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
