The effect of 3‐D printed polylactic acid scaffold with and without hyaluronic acid on bone regeneration

Background Three‐ dimensional (3D) technology has been suggested to overcome several limitations in guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedures because 3D‐printed scaffolds can be easily molded to patient‐specific bone defect site. This study aimed to investigate the effect of 3‐D printed polylactic a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of periodontology (1970) 2022-07, Vol.93 (7), p.1072-1082
Main Authors: Yun, Junseob, Lee, Jungwon, Ha, Cheol Woo, Park, Seong Je, Kim, Sungtae, Koo, Ki‐Tae, Seol, Yang‐Jo, Lee, Yong‐Moo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
biocompatible materials
bone regeneration
bone substitutes
collagen
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Three‐ dimensional (3D) technology has been suggested to overcome several limitations in guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedures because 3D‐printed scaffolds can be easily molded to patient‐specific bone defect site. This study aimed to investigate the effect of 3‐D printed polylactic acid (PLA) scaffolds with or without hyaluronic acid (HA) in a rabbit calvaria model. Methods A calvaria defect with a diameter of 15 mm was created in 30 New Zealand white rabbits. The rabbits were randomly allocated into three groups including no graft group (control, n = 10), 3D printed PLA graft group (3D‐PLA, n = 10), and 3D printed PLA with hyaluronic acid graft group (3D‐PLA/HA, n = 10). Five animals in each group were sacrificed at 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. Microcomputed tomography and histologic and histomorphometric analyses were performed. Results Over the whole examination period, no significant adverse reactions were observed. There were no statistically significant differences in bone volume (BV) /tissue volume (TV) among the three groups at 4 weeks. However, the highest BV/TV was observed in the 3D‐PLA/HA group at 12 weeks. The new bone area for control, 3D‐PLA, and 3D‐PLA/HA showed no statistical differences at 4 weeks. However, the value was significantly higher in the 3D‐PLA and 3D‐PLA/HA groups compared to the control group at 12 weeks. Conclusion The 3D printed PLA scaffolds was biocompatible and integrated well with bone defect margin. They were also provided the proper space for new bone formation. Therefore, 3D printed PLA/HA might be a potential tool to enhance bone augmentation.
ISSN:0022-3492
1943-3670
DOI:10.1002/JPER.21-0428