Page 558 - IJB-10-2
P. 558

International Journal of Bioprinting                              OLS design for distal femur osseointegration




            procedure simulated the strain experienced in the bone   transmittance, indicate a greater number of surviving
            surrounding the OLS implant, NLS implant, and bone   MG-63 cells.
            cement during gait (Figure 4). The strain data obtained
            through biomechanical testing were compared with the   2.7. Animal experiments for simulating the efficacy
            values derived from finite element analysis to validate   of lattice osseointegration
            the accuracy of the analytical results.            Surgical  procedures  for  animal  experiments  were
                                                               approved by the Animal Use Protocol National Laboratory
            2.6. In vitro biological tests of lattice structures  Animal Center (NARLabs) (IACUC Approval No.: TIRI-
            In vitro biological experiments were performed to observe   IACUC-2023-009). The experiments were conducted on
            the impact of a specific lattice structure on essential aspects   Lanyu pigs, which were divided into two groups based on
            of the behaviors of MG-63 cells, an osteoblast-like cell   the type of implants: solid and optimized lattice structure.
            line,  including  growth,  differentiation,  and  migration.   Each group consisted of three specimens (n = 3). These
            The culture medium for cultivating MG-63 cells contains   implant specimens, designed as cylinders (Ø 4.2 mm/L 10
            10% fetal bovine serum. MG-63 cells were first cultured   mm), were fabricated using metal 3D printing, following
            in an environment maintained at 37°C, 5% CO , 95%   the same parameters as described in the previous section
                                                     2
            air, and 100% relative humidity for 48 h. A mixture of   for biomechanical specimens. The animal experiments
            MG-63 cells and culture medium was quantitatively   were conducted in stages: preoperative, intraoperative,
            added to both smooth discs and discs featuring the OLS   post-operative, and sacrifice. In the preoperative stage, a
            structure (n = 3). These specimens were then placed in a   mixture of Zoletil/Telazol and xylazine was administered
            cell culture incubator for 24, 48, and 72 h. Following the   via intramuscular injection as premedication anesthesia,
            completion of cell growth, a quantitative MTT solution   followed by penicillin G and meloxicam to prevent infections
            (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium   and alleviate pain. During the operation, a hole with a
            bromide) was added to each specimen. This solution reacts   diameter of 4.2 mm and a depth of 10 mm was created in
            with the mitochondria in the cells, producing formazan.   the distal lateral femur using a bone drill for the individual
            Subsequently,  dimethyl  sulfoxide  (DMSO)  solution  was   implantation of specimens. A plate (approximately 120
            added to dissolve the formazan in the surviving MG-63   mm in length, 3 mm in thickness) and a screw (3 mm
            cells. The optical density value (OD value) of the solution   in diameter, 10 mm in length) were secured to the distal
            was then measured using a full-wavelength spectrometer.   lateral femur to enhance strength. Post-surgery, C-arm
            Through a full-wavelength spectrometer, the transmittance   fluoroscopy X-ray confirmed the position of implants and
            and absorbance of the solution can be measured to evaluate   any abnormalities. Post-operative care included the oral
            the OD value. Higher OD values, resulting from lower   administration of meloxicam and the antibiotic cephalexin































               Figure 4. Biomechanical tests on the OLS implant, NLS implant, and bone cement for evaluating the strain in the bone surrounding the implant.


            Volume 10 Issue 2 (2024)                       550                                doi: 10.36922/ijb.2590
   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563