ArticleBiomedicines2024
Conventional Manufacturing by Pouring Versus Additive Manufacturing Technology of β-Tricalcium Phosphate Bone Substitute Implants.
Article in Biomedicines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare conventional sintering with additive manufacturing techniques for β-TCP bioceramics, focusing on mechanical properties and biocompatibility. A "critical" bone defect requires surgical intervention beyond simple stabilization. Autologous bone grafting is the gold standard treatment for such defects, but it has its limitations. Alloplastic bone grafting with synthetic materials is becoming increasingly popular. The use of bone graft substitutes has increased significantly, and current research has focused on optimizing these substitutes, whereas this study compares two existing manufacturing techniques and the resulting β-TCP implants. The 3D printed β-TCP hybrid structure implant was fabricated from two components, a column structure and a freeze foam, which were sintered together. The conventionally fabricated ceramics were fabricated by casting. Both scaffolds were characterized for porosity, mechanical properties, and biocompatibility. The hybrid structure had an overall porosity of 74.4 ± 0.5%. The microporous β-TCP implants had a porosity of 43.5 ± 2.4%, while the macroporous β-TCP implants had a porosity of 61.81%. Mechanical testing revealed that the hybrid structure had a compressive strength of 10.4 ± 6 MPa, which was significantly lower than the microporous β-TCP implants with 32.9 ± 8.7 MPa. Biocompatibility evaluations showed a steady increase in cell proliferation over time for all the β-TCP implants, with minimal cytotoxicity. This study provides a valuable insight into the potential of additive manufacturing for β-TCP bioceramics in the treatment of bone defects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.