Cited by 157Bone Tissue Engineering MaterialsAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies3D Printing in Biomedical Research

Morphological and mechanical characterization of 3D printed PLA scaffolds with controlled porosity for trabecular bone tissue replacement

Baptista, R., Guedes, M.·2021·Materials Science and Engineering: C

Abstract

Bone transplant is still the gold standard approach when dealing with orthopedic trauma or disease. When this solution is not possible, scaffolding is a possibility provided by bone tissue engineering. To support the regeneration process, damaged bone tissue is removed and replaced by porous scaffold structures. In recent years, additive manufacturing has shown huge potential to produce scaffold structures with the required performance. In the current work, PLA scaffolds with different designs were 3D printed, using optimal manufacturing parameters. Scaffolds with three different porosity values were obtained by changing the filament offset from 571 to 1333 μm. A total of twelve designs were tested under monotonic and dynamic compression conditions. Numerical analysis showed good correlation with experimental results, allowing for a better assessment of scaffold mechanical behavior. Stress relaxation was measured on four different strain levels, assessing scaffold's behavior after implantation and consequent static response over time. Overall, orthogonal design provided better performance, due to improved material deposition. With lower porosity scaffolds equilibrium stress reached 24 MPa after 300 s relaxation time under 4% deformation, and the obtained equilibrium modulus was 428 MPa. Overall, attained results show that 3D printing with PLA can be applied in the manufacture of scaffolds for trabecular bone replacement.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.msec.2020.111528

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The choice of pore size depends on the method used to construct the scaffold and may have an impact on its mechanical and dynamic stability.

    “The choice of pore size depends on the method used to construct the scaffold and may have an impact on its mechanical and dynamic stability [88].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baptista, R., & Guedes, M.
Affiliations
University of Lisbon (PT)
Corresponding author
Baptista, R.
Venue
Materials Science and Engineering: C
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
118
Pages
111528
ISSN
0928-4931 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3087893877
Cited by
157
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 1
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Materials Science and Engineering C (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Keywords
polylactic acid scaffolds, 3D printing, porosity control, mechanical behavior, stress relaxation, dynamic compression, numerical analysis, bone tissue engineering, scaffold design
MeSH terms
Cancellous Bone, Polyesters, Porosity, Tissue Engineering, Tissue Scaffolds, Printing, Three-Dimensional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review