Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36290472›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Mechanical Characterisation and Numerical Modelling of TPMS-Based Gyroid and Diamond Ti6Al4V Scaffolds for Bone Implants: An Integrated Approach for Translational Consideration.

Seyed Ataollah Naghavi, Maryam Tamaddon, Arsalan Marghoub, Katherine Wang, Behzad Bahrami Babamiri, Kavan Hazeli, Wei Xu, Xin Lu, Changning Sun, Liqing Wang and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Seyed Ataollah NaghaviInstitute of Orthopaedic & Musculoskeletal, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6111-8163
Maryam TamaddonInstitute of Orthopaedic & Musculoskeletal, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4669-3597
Arsalan MarghoubDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 7JE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0839-576X
Katherine WangDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 7JE, UK.
Behzad Bahrami BabamiriAerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.
Kavan HazeliAerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.
Wei XuInstitute of Orthopaedic & Musculoskeletal, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK.
Xin LuNational Engineering Research Center for Advanced Rolling and Intelligent Manufacturing, Institute of Engineering Technology, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China.
Changning SunInstitute of Orthopaedic & Musculoskeletal, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK.
Liqing WangState Key Laboratory of Metal Matrix Composites, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China.
Mehran MoazenDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 7JE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9951-2975
Ling WangState Key Laboratory for Manufacturing Systems Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Dichen LiState Key Laboratory for Manufacturing Systems Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Chaozong LiuInstitute of Orthopaedic & Musculoskeletal, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9854-4043

Funding

Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (EPSRC) EP/T517793/1EU via the H2020-MSCA-RISE-2016 program 734156Innovate UK via Newton Fund 102872National Key R&D Project of China 2018YFE0207900Royal Society via International Exchange scheme IEC\NSFC\191253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Additive manufacturing has been used to develop a variety of scaffold designs for clinical and industrial applications. Mechanical properties (i.e., compression, tension, bending, and torsion response) of these scaffolds are significantly important for load-bearing orthopaedic implants. In this study, we designed and additively manufactured porous metallic biomaterials based on two different types of triply periodic minimal surface structures (i.e., gyroid and diamond) that mimic the mechanical properties of bone, such as porosity, stiffness, and strength. Physical and mechanical properties, including compressive, tensile, bending, and torsional stiffness and strength of the developed scaffolds, were then characterised experimentally and numerically using finite element method. Sheet thickness was constant at 300 μm, and the unit cell size was varied to generate different pore sizes and porosities. Gyroid scaffolds had a pore size in the range of 600-1200 μm and a porosity in the range of 54-72%, respectively. Corresponding values for the diamond were 900-1500 μm and 56-70%. Both structure types were validated experimentally, and a wide range of mechanical properties (including stiffness and yield strength) were predicted using the finite element method. The stiffness and strength of both structures are comparable to that of cortical bone, hence reducing the risks of scaffold failure. The results demonstrate that the developed scaffolds mimic the physical and mechanical properties of cortical bone and can be suitable for bone replacement and orthopaedic implants. However, an optimal design should be chosen based on specific performance requirements.

Indexed as

additive manufacturingbending strengthbiomedical scaffoldsbone scaffoldsfinite element analysislattice structuresmechanical propertiesTi6Al4V scaffoldstorsional strengthTPMS scaffolds

Identifiers

PMID36290472
PMCPMC9598079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.