Page 559 - IJB-9-6

International Journal of Bioprinting 3D printing of PCL-ceramic composite scaffolds

scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering. J Tissue Eng Regen 65. Park SA, Lee HJ, Kim KS, et al., 2018, In vivo evaluation
Med, 9: 1286–1297. of 3D-printed polycaprolactone scaffold implantation
combined with β-TCP powder for alveolar bone
https://doi.org/10.1002/term.1682
augmentation in a beagle defect model. Materials, 11: 238.
55. Ma J, Lin L, Zuo Y, et al., 2019, Modification of 3D printed
PCL scaffolds by PVAc and HA to enhance cytocompatibility https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11020238
and osteogenesis. RSC Adv, 9: 5338–5346. 66. Murphy CM, Haugh MG, O’brien FJ, 2010, The effect
of mean pore size on cell attachment, proliferation and
https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RA06652C
migration in collagen-glycosaminoglycan scaffolds for bone
56. Adhikari U, Rijal NP, Khanal S, et al., 2016, Magnesium and tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 31: 461–466.
calcium-containing scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration.
In: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.09.063
and Exposition. Vol. 50688. New York, United States: 67. O’Brien FJ, Harley BA, Yannas IV, et al., 2005, The effect
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. of pore size on cell adhesion in collagen-GAG scaffolds.
Biomaterials, 26: 433–441.
https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2016-66835
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.02.052
57. Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW, 2012, NIH
Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods, 68. Wibowo A, Vyas C, Cooper G, et al., 2020, 3D printing of
9: 671–675. polycaprolactone-polyaniline electroactive scaffolds for
bone tissue engineering. Materials, 13: 512.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13030512
58. Huang B, Bártolo PJ, 2018, Rheological characterization of
polymer/ceramic blends for 3D printing of bone scaffolds. 69. Loh QL, Choong C, 2013, Three-dimensional scaffolds for
Polym Test, 68: 365–378. tissue engineering applications: Role of porosity and pore
size. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 19: 485–502.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.04.033
59. Jiang W, Shi J, Li W, et al., 2012, Morphology, wettability, and https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEB.2012.0437
mechanical properties of polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite 70. Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D, 2005, Porosity of 3D biomaterial
composite scaffolds with interconnected pore structures scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials, 26: 5474–5491.
fabricated by a mini‐deposition system. Polym Eng Sci,
52: 2396–2402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002
71. Edwards A, Jarvis D, Hopkins T, et al., 2015, Poly
https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.23193
(ε-caprolactone)/keratin-based composite nanofibers
60. Jia J, Zhou H, Wei J, et al., 2010, Development of magnesium for biomedical applications. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl
calcium phosphate biocement for bone regeneration. J R Soc Biomater, 103: 21–30.
Interface, 7: 1171–1180.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.33172
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2009.0559
72. Gomes SR, Rodrigues G, Martins GG, et al., 2015, In vitro
61. Fazeli N, Arefian E, Irani S, et al., 2021, 3D-printed PCL and in vivo evaluation of electrospun nanofibers of PCL,
scaffolds coated with nanobioceramics enhance osteogenic chitosan and gelatin: A comparative study. Mater Sci Eng C,
differentiation of stem cells. ACS Omega, 6: 35284–35296. 46: 348–358.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c04015 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2014.10.051
62. Yang X, Wang Y, Zhou Y, et al., 2021, The application of 73. Wang J, Witte F, Xi T, et al., 2015, Recommendation for modifying
polycaprolactone in three-dimensional printing scaffolds for current cytotoxicity testing standards for biodegradable
bone tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel), 13: 2754. magnesium-based materials. Acta Biomater, 21: 237–249.
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13162754 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2015.04.011
63. Liu D, Nie W, Li D, et al., 2019, 3D printed PCL/SrHA 74. Dietrich E, Oudadesse H, Lucas‐Girot A, et al., 2009,
scaffold for enhanced bone regeneration. Chem Eng J, In vitro bioactivity of melt‐derived glass 46S6 doped with
362: 269–279. magnesium. J Biomed Mater Res A, 88: 1087–1096.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.01.015 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.31901
64. Park SA, Lee SJ, Seok JM, et al., 2018, Fabrication of 3D 75. Sader MS, LeGeros RZ, Soares GA, 2009, Human osteoblasts
printed PCL/PEG polyblend scaffold using rapid prototyping adhesion and proliferation on magnesium-substituted
system for bone tissue engineering application. J Bionic Eng, tricalcium phosphate dense tablets. J Mater Sci Mater Med,
15: 435–442. 20: 521–527.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-018-0034-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-008-3610-3

Volume 9 Issue 6 (2023) 551 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijb.0196