Boosting bone regeneration using augmented melt-extruded additive-manufactured scaffolds

References

• Porter JR, Ruckh TT, Popat KC. Bone tissue engineering: a review in bone biomimetics and drug delivery strategies. Biotechnol Prog. 2009;25(6):1539–1560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rho J-Y, Kuhn-Spearing L, Zioupos P. Mechanical properties and the hierarchical structure of bone. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(2):92–102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckwalter J, Glimcher M, Cooper R, et al. Bone biology. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(8):1256–1275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keaveny TM, Morgan EF, Yeh OC. Bone mechanics. In: Myer Kutz, editor. Standard handbook of biomedical engineering and design. 2003. p. 1–24. New York: McGRAW-HILL.
   Google Scholar
• Reilly DT, Burstein AH. The elastic and ultimate properties of compact bone tissue. J Biomech. 1975;8(6):393–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopperdahl DL, Keaveny TM. Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. J Biomech. 1998;31(7):601–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan EF, Keaveny TM. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech. 2001;34(5):569–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rho JY, Ashman RB, Turner CH. Young's modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech. 1993;26(2):111–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gong JK, Arnold JS, Cohn SH. Composition of trabecular and cortical bone. Anat Rec. 1964;149(3):325–331.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Burr DB. Targeted and nontargeted remodeling. Bone. 2002;30(1):2–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crockett JC, Rogers MJ, Coxon FP, et al. Bone remodelling at a glance. J Cell Sci. 2011;124(Pt 7):991–998.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating JF, Simpson AH, Robinson CM. The management of fractures with bone loss. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(2):142–150.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marsell R, Einhorn TA. The biology of fracture healing. Injury. 2011;42(6):551–555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Research and markets. U.S. Market for Orthopedic Biomaterials 2010; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Green E, Lubahn JD, Evans J. Risk factors, treatment, and outcomes associated with nonunion of the midshaft humerus fracture. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2005;14(2):64–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Catagni MA, Guerreschi F, Lovisetti L. Distraction osteogenesis for bone repair in the 21st century: lessons learned. Injury. 2011;42(6):580–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giannoudis PV, Faour O, Goff T, et al. Masquelet technique for the treatment of bone defects: tips-tricks and future directions. Injury. 2011;42(6):591–598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karger C, Kishi T, Schneider L, et al. Treatment of posttraumatic bone defects by the induced membrane technique. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98(1):97–102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myeroff C, Archdeacon M. Autogenous bone graft: donor sites and techniques. J Bone Joint Surg. 2011;93(23):2227–2236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiegelberg B, Parratt T, Dheerendra SK, et al. Ilizarov principles of deformity correction. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010;92(2):101–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruskin E, Doll BA, Futrell FW, et al. Demineralized bone matrix in bone repair: history and use. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2012;64(12):1063–1077.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyer KM. The principles of the Ilizarov apparatus. In: Iyer KM, Khan WS, editors. General principles of orthopedics and trauma. London: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 607–617.
   Google Scholar
• Henkel J, Woodruff MA, Epari DR, et al. Bone regeneration based on tissue engineering conceptions — a 21st century perspective. Bone Res. 2013;1(3):216–248.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hutmacher DW. Scaffolds in tissue engineering bone and cartilage. Biomaterials. 2000;21(24):2529–2543.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leong KF, Chua CK, Sudarmadji N, et al. Engineering functionally graded tissue engineering scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2008;1(2):140–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials. 2005;26(27):5474–5491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Bael S, Chai YC, Truscello S, et al. The effect of pore geometry on the in vitro biological behavior of human periosteum-derived cells seeded on selective laser-melted Ti6Al4V bone scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(7):2824–2834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadpoor AA. Bone tissue regeneration: the role of scaffold geometry. Biomater Sci. 2015;3(2):231–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumpler M, Woesz A, Dunlop JW, et al. The effect of geometry on three-dimensional tissue growth. J R Soc Interface. 2008;5(27):1173–1180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bidan CM, Kommareddy KP, Rumpler M, et al. Geometry as a factor for tissue growth: towards shape optimization of tissue engineering scaffolds. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2013;2(1):186–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachlos E, Czernuszka JT. Making tissue engineering scaffolds work. Review: the application of solid freeform fabrication technology to the production of tissue engineering scaffolds. Eur Cell Mater. 2003;5:29–40. Discussion 39–40.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wubneh A, Tsekoura EK, Ayranci C, et al. Current state of fabrication technologies and materials for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2018;80:1–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mota C, Puppi D, Chiellini F, et al. Additive manufacturing techniques for the production of tissue engineering constructs. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2015;9(3):174–190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moroni L, Boland T, Burdick JA, et al. Biofabrication: a guide to technology and terminology. Trends Biotechnol. 2018;36(4):384–402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calore AR, Sinha R, Harings J, et al. Additive manufacturing using melt extruded thermoplastics for tissue engineering. Methods Mol Biol. 2021;2147:75–99.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Butscher A, Bohner M, Hofmann S, et al. Structural and material approaches to bone tissue engineering in powder-based three-dimensional printing. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(3):907–920.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu W, Wang D, Huang J, et al. Low-temperature deposition manufacturing: a novel and promising rapid prototyping technology for the fabrication of tissue-engineered scaffold. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;70:976–982.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puppi D, Chiellini F. Wet-spinning of biomedical polymers: from single-fibre production to additive manufacturing of three-dimensional scaffolds. Polym Int. 2017;66(12):1690–1696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melchels FP, Feijen J, Grijpma DW. A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials. 2010;31(24):6121–6130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutmacher DW, Sittinger M, Risbud MV. Scaffold-based tissue engineering: rationale for computer-aided design and solid free-form fabrication systems. Trends Biotechnol. 2004;22(7):354–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conn J, Oyasu R, Welsh M, et al. Vicryl (polyglactin 910) synthetic absorbable sutures. Am J Surg. 1974;128(1):19–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezwada RS, Jamiolkowski DD, Lee I-Y, et al. Monocryl® suture, a new ultra-pliable absorbable monofilament suture. Biomaterials. 1995;16(15):1141–1148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber FA, Dockery WD. Long-term absorption of poly-L-lactic acid interference screws. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(8):820–826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutmacher DW, Schantz T, Zein I, et al. Mechanical properties and cell cultural response of polycaprolactone scaffolds designed and fabricated via fused deposition modeling. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;55(2):203–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schantz J-T, Lim T-C, Ning C, et al. Cranioplasty after trephination using a novel biodegradable burr hole cover: technical case report. Oper Neurosurg. 2006;58(suppl_1):ONS-E176-ONS-E176.
   Google Scholar
• Low SW, Ng YJ, Yeo TT, et al. Use of osteoplug polycaprolactone implants as novel burr-hole covers. Singapore Med J. 2009;50(8):777–780.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youssef A, Hollister SJ, Dalton PD. Additive manufacturing of polymer melts for implantable medical devices and scaffolds. Biofabrication. 2017;9(1):012002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ming, Hui HJ, Vincent DW, et al. Cranial reconstruction using a polycaprolactone implant after burr hole trephination. J 3D Print Med. 2020;4(1):9–16.
   Google Scholar
• Goh BT, Teh LY, Tan DBP, et al. Novel 3D polycaprolactone scaffold for ridge preservation–a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(3):271–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo L, Teoh SH, Liu Y, et al. A novel bioresorbable implant for repair of orbital floor fractures. Orbit. 2015;34(4):192–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deschamps A, Claase M, Sleijster W, et al. Design of segmented poly(ether ester) materials and structures for tissue engineering of bone. J Controlled Release. 2002;78:175–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang M-N. Biodegradable and bioactive porous polyurethanes scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Sci Eng. 2009;02:36–40.
   Google Scholar
• Yu NY, Schindeler A, Little DG, et al. Biodegradable poly (α-hydroxy acid) polymer scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2010;93(1):285–295.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dwivedi R, Kumar S, Pandey R, et al. Polycaprolactone as biomaterial for bone scaffolds: review of literature. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(1):381–388.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Griffin M, Castro N, Bas O, et al. The current versatility of polyurethane three-dimensional printing for biomedical applications. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2020;26(3):272–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen M, Xu L, Zhou Y, et al. Poly(ϵ-caprolactone)-based substrates bearing pendant small chemical groups as a platform for systemic investigation of chondrogenesis. Cell Prolif. 2016;49(4):512–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baran EH, Erbil HY. Surface modification of 3D printed PLA objects by fused deposition modeling: a review. Colloids Interfaces. 2019;3(2):43.
   Google Scholar
• Olubamiji AD, Izadifar Z, Si JL, et al. Modulating mechanical behaviour of 3D-printed cartilage-mimetic PCL scaffolds: influence of molecular weight and pore geometry. Biofabrication. 2016;8(2):025020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zein I, Hutmacher DW, Tan KC, et al. Fused deposition modeling of novel scaffold architectures for tissue engineering applications. Biomaterials. 2002;23(4):1169–1185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moroni L, De Wijn J, Van Blitterswijk C. 3D fiber-deposited scaffolds for tissue engineering: influence of pores geometry and architecture on dynamic mechanical properties. Biomaterials. 2006;27(7):974–985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camarero-Espinosa S, Calore A, Wilbers A, et al. Additive manufacturing of an elastic poly(ester)urethane for cartilage tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2020;102:192–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrowska B, Di Luca A, Moroni L, et al. Influence of internal pore architecture on biological and mechanical properties of three-dimensional fiber deposited scaffolds for bone regeneration. Biomed Mater Res A. 2016 Apr;104(4):991–1001.
   Google Scholar
• Valainis D, Dondl P, Foehr P, et al. Integrated additive design and manufacturing approach for the bioengineering of bone scaffolds for favorable mechanical and biological properties. Biomed Mater. 2019;14(6):065002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartnikowski M, Klein TJ, Melchels FP, et al. Effects of scaffold architecture on mechanical characteristics and osteoblast response to static and perfusion bioreactor cultures. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2014;111(7):1440–1451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang X, Gao J, Xu W, et al. Structural mechanics of 3D-printed poly(lactic acid) scaffolds with tetragonal, hexagonal and wheel-like designs. Biofabrication. 2019;11(3):035009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobral JM, Caridade SG, Sousa RA, et al. Three-dimensional plotted scaffolds with controlled pore size gradients: effect of scaffold geometry on mechanical performance and cell seeding efficiency. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(3):1009–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holy CE, Shoichet MS, Davies JE. Engineering three-dimensional bone tissuein vitro using biodegradable scaffolds: investigating initial cell-seeding density and culture period. J Biomed Mater Res. 2000;51(3):376–382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Ma T, Kniss DA, et al. Effects of filtration seeding on cell density, spatial distribution, and proliferation in nonwoven fibrous matrices. Biotechnol Prog. 2001;17(5):935–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Luca A, Ostrowska B, Lorenzo-Moldero I, et al. Gradients in pore size enhance the osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stromal cells in three-dimensional scaffolds. Sci Rep. 2016;6:22898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodfield TB, Moroni L, Malda J. Combinatorial approaches to controlling cell behaviour and tissue formation in 3D via rapid-prototyping and smart scaffold design. Comb Chem High Throughput Screening. 2009;12(6):562–579.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Luca A, Lorenzo-Moldero I, Mota C, et al. Tuning cell differentiation into a 3D scaffold presenting a pore shape gradient for osteochondral regeneration. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2016;5(14):1753–1763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berner A, Woodruff M, Lam C, et al. Effects of scaffold architecture on cranial bone healing. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;43(4):506–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim J-H, Jeong J-h, Won J-Y, et al. Porosity effect of 3D-printed polycaprolactone membranes on calvarial defect model for guided bone regeneration. Biomed Mater. 2018;13(1):015014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roosa SMM, Kemppainen JM, Moffitt EN, et al. The pore size of polycaprolactone scaffolds has limited influence on bone regeneration in an in vivo model. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010;92(1):359–368.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rechendorff K, Hovgaard MB, Foss M, et al. Enhancement of protein adsorption induced by surface roughness. Langmuir. 2006;22(26):10885–10888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalby MJ, Gadegaard N, Tare R, et al. The control of human mesenchymal cell differentiation using nanoscale symmetry and disorder. Nat Mater. 2007;6(12):997–1003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faia-Torres AB, Guimond-Lischer S, Rottmar M, et al. Differential regulation of osteogenic differentiation of stem cells on surface roughness gradients. Biomaterials. 2014;35(33):9023–9032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang SJ, Jiang D, Zhang ZZ, et al. Biomimetic nanosilica–collagen scaffolds for in situ bone regeneration: toward a cell-free, one-step surgery. Adv Mater. 2019;31(49):1904341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasoulianboroujeni M, Kiaie N, Tabatabaei FS, et al. Dual porosity protein-based scaffolds with enhanced cell infiltration and proliferation. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kumar G, Waters MS, Farooque TM, et al. Freeform fabricated scaffolds with roughened struts that enhance both stem cell proliferation and differentiation by controlling cell shape. Biomaterials. 2012;33(16):4022–4030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar G, Tison CK, Chatterjee K, et al. The determination of stem cell fate by 3D scaffold structures through the control of cell shape. Biomaterials. 2011;32(35):9188–9196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamani Y, Mohammadi J, Amoabediny G, et al. Enhanced osteogenic activity by MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts on chemically surface-modified poly(ϵ-caprolactone) 3D-printed scaffolds compared to RGD immobilized scaffolds. Biomed Mater. 2019;14(1):015008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosik-Kozioł A, Graham E, Jaroszewicz J, et al. Surface modification of 3D printed polycaprolactone constructs via a solvent treatment: impact on physical and osteogenic properties. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2019;5(1):318–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visscher LE, Dang HP, Knackstedt MA, et al. 3D printed polycaprolactone scaffolds with dual macro-microporosity for applications in local delivery of antibiotics. Mater Sci Eng C. 2018;87:78–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinha R, Cámara-Torres M, Scopece P, et al. A hybrid additive manufacturing platform to create bulk and surface composition gradients on scaffolds for tissue regeneration. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies JE. Bone bonding at natural and biomaterial surfaces. Biomaterials. 2007;28(34):5058–5067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hing KA, Annaz B, Saeed S, et al. Microporosity enhances bioactivity of synthetic bone graft substitutes. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16(5):467–475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castro NJ, Tan WN, Shen C, et al. Simulated body fluid nucleation of three-dimensional printed elastomeric scaffolds for enhanced osteogenesis. Tissue Eng Part A. 2016;22(13-14):940–948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song P, Zhou C, Fan H, et al. Novel 3D porous biocomposite scaffolds fabricated by fused deposition modeling and gas foaming combined technology. Compos B Eng. 2018;152:151–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi WJ, Hwang KS, Kwon HJ, et al. Rapid development of dual porous poly(lactic acid) foam using fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing for medical scaffold application. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;110:110693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castaño M, Martinez-Campos E, Pintado-Sierra M, et al. Combining breath figures and supercritical fluids to obtain porous polymer scaffolds. ACS Omega. 2018;3(10):12593–12599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Geyter N, Morent R. 7 - Cold plasma surface modification of biodegradable polymer biomaterials. In: Dubruel P, Van Vlierberghe S, editors. Biomaterials for bone regeneration. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2014. p. 202–224.
   Google Scholar
• Keselowsky BG, Collard DM, Garcı́a AJ. Surface chemistry modulates focal adhesion composition and signaling through changes in integrin binding. Biomaterials. 2004;25(28):5947–5954.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curran JM, Chen R, Hunt JA. The guidance of human mesenchymal stem cell differentiation in vitro by controlled modifications to the cell substrate. Biomaterials. 2006;27(27):4783–4793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massia SP, Hubbell JA. Immobilized amines and basic amino acids as mimetic heparin-binding domains for cell surface proteoglycan-mediated adhesion. J Biol Chem. 1992;267(14):10133–10141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb K, Hlady V, Tresco PA. Relative importance of surface wettability and charged functional groups on NIH 3T3 fibroblast attachment, spreading, and cytoskeletal organization. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;41(3):422–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildirim ED, Pappas D, Güçeri S, et al. Enhanced cellular functions on polycaprolactone tissue scaffolds by O2 plasma surface modification. Plasma Processes Polym. 2011;8(3):256–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs T, Declercq H, De Geyter N, et al. Improved cell adhesion to flat and porous plasma-treated poly-ϵ-caprolactone samples. Surf Coat Technol. 2013;232:447–455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeon H, Lee H, Kim G. A surface-modified poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffold comprising variable nanosized surface-roughness using a plasma treatment. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2014;20(12):951–963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang M, Favi P, Cheng X, et al. Cold atmospheric plasma (CAP) surface nanomodified 3D printed polylactic acid (PLA) scaffolds for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2016;46:256–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domingos M, Intranuovo F, Gloria A, et al. Improved osteoblast cell affinity on plasma-modified 3-D extruded PCL scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(4):5997–6005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerman MJ, Smith BT, Gerald AG, et al. Aminated 3D printed polystyrene maintains stem cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2020;26(2):118–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin MF, Ibrahim A, Seifalian AM, et al. Chemical group-dependent plasma polymerisation preferentially directs adipose stem cell differentiation towards osteogenic or chondrogenic lineages. Acta Biomater. 2017;50:450–461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cools P, Declercq H, Ghobeira R, et al. Acrylic acid plasma coatings for enhanced cell migration in PCL 3D additive manufactured scaffolds. Surf Coat Technol. 2018;350:925–935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cools P, Mota C, Lorenzo-Moldero I, et al. Acrylic acid plasma coated 3D scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering applications. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):3830.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cools P, Sainz-García E, Geyter ND, et al. Influence of DBD inlet geometry on the homogeneity of plasma-polymerized acrylic acid films: the use of a microplasma–electrode inlet configuration. Plasma Processes Polym. 2015;12(10):1153–1163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Geyter N, Morent R, Leys C. Penetration of a dielectric barrier discharge plasma into textile structures at medium pressure. Plasma Sources Sci Technol. 2006;15(1):78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sardella E, Salama RA, Waly GH, et al. Improving internal cell colonization of porous scaffolds with chemical gradients produced by plasma assisted approaches. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2017;9(5):4966–4975.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu X, Laroussi M, Puech V. On atmospheric-pressure non-equilibrium plasma jets and plasma bullets. Plasma Sources Sci Technol. 2012;21(3):034005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu F, Wang W, Hinduja S, et al. Hybrid additive manufacturing system for zonal plasma-treated scaffolds. 3D Print Addit Manuf. 2018;5(3):205–213.
   Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Wang R, Chen S, et al. Heparan sulfate loaded polycaprolactone-hydroxyapatite scaffolds with 3D printing for bone defect repair. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020;148:153–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farto-Vaamonde X, Auriemma G, Aquino RP, et al. Post-manufacture loading of filaments and 3D printed PLA scaffolds with prednisolone and dexamethasone for tissue regeneration applications. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2019;141:100–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen C-Y, Chen C-C, Wang C-Y, et al. Assessment of the release of vascular endothelial growth factor from 3D-printed poly-ϵ-caprolactone/hydroxyapatite/calcium sulfate scaffold with enhanced osteogenic capacity. Polymers (Basel). 2020;12(7):1455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian L, Zhang Z, Tian B, et al. Study on antibacterial properties and cytocompatibility of EPL coated 3D printed PCL/HA composite scaffolds. RSC Adv. 2020;10(8):4805–4816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer AA, Song SJ, Susanto E, et al. The stimulation of healing within a rat calvarial defect by mPCL–TCP/collagen scaffolds loaded with rhBMP-2. Biomaterials. 2009;30(13):2479–2488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reddi AH. Role of morphogenetic proteins in skeletal tissue engineering and regeneration. Nat Biotechnol. 1998;16(3):247–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan Y, Chen H, Zhang H, et al. Vascularized 3D printed scaffolds for promoting bone regeneration. Biomaterials. 2019;190–191:97–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li S, Xu Y, Yu J, et al. Enhanced osteogenic activity of poly(ester urea) scaffolds using facile post-3D printing peptide functionalization strategies. Biomaterials. 2017;141:176–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes B, Zhu W, Li J, et al. Development of novel three-dimensional printed scaffolds for osteochondral regeneration. Tissue Eng Part A. 2015;21(1-2):403–415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang Y, Yang S, Wang Y, et al. Anti-infective efficacy, cytocompatibility and biocompatibility of a 3D-printed osteoconductive composite scaffold functionalized with quaternized chitosan. Acta Biomater. 2016;46:112–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang Y, Chu L, Yang S, et al. Dual-functional 3D-printed composite scaffold for inhibiting bacterial infection and promoting bone regeneration in infected bone defect models. Acta Biomater. 2018;79:265–275.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang H, Xu F-J. Biomolecule-functionalized polymer brushes. Chem Soc Rev. 2013;42(8):3394–3426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Declercq HA, Desmet T, Berneel EE, et al. Synergistic effect of surface modification and scaffold design of bioplotted 3-D poly-ϵ-caprolactone scaffolds in osteogenic tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(8):7699–7708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tardajos MG, Cama G, Dash M, et al. Chitosan functionalized poly-ϵ-caprolactone electrospun fibers and 3D printed scaffolds as antibacterial materials for tissue engineering applications. Carbohydr Polym. 2018;191:127–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunnewiek MK, Di Luca A, Bollemaat HZ, et al. Creeping proteins in microporous structures: polymer brush-assisted fabrication of 3D gradients for tissue engineering. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2015;4(8):1169–1174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Luca A, Klein-Gunnewiek M, Vancso JG, et al. Covalent binding of bone morphogenetic protein-2 and transforming growth factor-β3 to 3D plotted scaffolds for osteochondral tissue regeneration. Biotechnol J. 2017;12(12):1700072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SJ, Won JE, Han C, et al. Development of a three-dimensionally printed scaffold grafted with bone forming peptide-1 for enhanced bone regeneration with in vitro and in vivo evaluations. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2019;539:468–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pati F, Song TH, Rijal G, et al. Ornamenting 3D printed scaffolds with cell-laid extracellular matrix for bone tissue regeneration. Biomaterials. 2015;37:230–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaidev LR, Chatterjee K. Surface functionalization of 3D printed polymer scaffolds to augment stem cell response. Mater Des. 2019;161:44–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madhurakkat Perikamana SK, Lee J, Lee YB, et al. Materials from Mussel-inspired chemistry for cell and tissue engineering applications. Biomacromolecules. 2015;16(9):2541–2555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira BN, Aprile P, Mendonça RH, et al. Evaluation of bone marrow stem cell response to PLA scaffolds manufactured by 3D printing and coated with polydopamine and type I collagen. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2019;107(1):37–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SJ, Lee D, Yoon TR, et al. Surface modification of 3D-printed porous scaffolds via mussel-inspired polydopamine and effective immobilization of rhBMP-2 to promote osteogenic differentiation for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2016;40:182–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng CH, Chen YW, Kai-Xing Lee A, et al. Development of mussel-inspired 3D-printed poly (lactic acid) scaffold grafted with bone morphogenetic protein-2 for stimulating osteogenesis. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2019;30(7):78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Lou Q, Wang L, et al. Immobilization of BMP-2-derived peptides on 3D-printed porous scaffolds for enhanced osteogenesis. Biomed Mater. 2020;15(1):015002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ku SH, Park CB. Human endothelial cell growth on mussel-inspired nanofiber scaffold for vascular tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2010;31(36):9431–9437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin YM, Lee YB, Shin H. Time-dependent mussel-inspired functionalization of poly(L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) substrates for tunable cell behaviors. Colloids Surf B. 2011;87(1):79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kao CT, Lin CC, Chen YW, et al. Poly(dopamine) coating of 3D printed poly(lactic acid) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2015;56:165–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong S, Kim KY, Wook HJ, et al. Attenuation of the in vivo toxicity of biomaterials by polydopamine surface modification. Nanomedicine. 2011;6(5):793–801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decaris ML, Leach JK. Design of experiments approach to engineer cell-secreted matrices for directing osteogenic differentiation. Ann Biomed Eng. 2011;39(4):1174–1185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu YA, Chiu YC, Lin YH, et al. 3D-Printed bioactive calcium silicate/poly-ϵ-caprolactone bioscaffolds modified with biomimetic extracellular matrices for bone regeneration. Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Feb 21;20(4):942.
   Google Scholar
• Li J, Chen M, Wei X, et al. Evaluation of 3D-printed polycaprolactone scaffolds coated with freeze-dried platelet-rich plasma for bone regeneration. Materials (Basel). 2017 Jul 19;10(7):831.
   Google Scholar
• Eppley BL, Woodell JE, Higgins J. Platelet quantification and growth factor analysis from platelet-rich plasma: implications for wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(6):1502–1508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsousou J, Thompson M, Hulley P, et al. The biology of platelet-rich plasma and its application in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg. 2009;91-B(8):987–996.
   Google Scholar
• Nakajima Y, Kawase T, Kobayashi M, et al. Bioactivity of freeze-dried platelet-rich plasma in an adsorbed form on a biodegradable polymer material. Platelets. 2012;23(8):594–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jo S, Kang SM, Park SA, et al. Enhanced adhesion of preosteoblasts inside 3D PCL scaffolds by polydopamine coating and mineralization. Macromol Biosci. 2013;13(10):1389–1395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryu J, Ku SH, Lee H, et al. Mussel-inspired polydopamine coating as a universal route to hydroxyapatite crystallization. Adv Funct Mater. 2010;20(13):2132–2139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murab S, Gruber SMS, Lin CJ, et al. Elucidation of bio-inspired hydroxyapatie crystallization on oxygen-plasma modified 3D printed poly-caprolactone scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;109:110529.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes B, Bulusu K, Plesniak M, et al. A synergistic approach to the design, fabrication and evaluation of 3D printed micro and nano featured scaffolds for vascularized bone tissue repair. Nanotechnology. 2016;27(6):064001–064001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhee S-H, Tanaka J. Effect of citric acid on the nucleation of hydroxyapatite in a simulated body fluid. Biomaterials. 1999;20(22):2155–2160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu YY, Rawal A, Schmidt-Rohr K. Strongly bound citrate stabilizes the apatite nanocrystals in bone. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107(52):22425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moroni L, Hamann D, Paoluzzi L, et al. Regenerating articular tissue by converging technologies. PLoS One. 2008;3(8):e3032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandakumar A, Cruz C, Mentink A, et al. Monolithic and assembled polymer–ceramic composites for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(3):5708–5717.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim J, McBride S, Tellis B, et al. Rapid-prototyped PLGA/β-TCP/hydroxyapatite nanocomposite scaffolds in a rabbit femoral defect model. Biofabrication. 2012;4(2):025003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chim H, Hutmacher DW, Chou AM, et al. A comparative analysis of scaffold material modifications for load-bearing applications in bone tissue engineering. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;35(10):928–934.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maia-Pinto MOC, Brochado ACB, Teixeira BN, et al. Biomimetic mineralization on 3D printed PLA scaffolds: on the response of human primary osteoblasts spheroids and in vivo implantation. Polymers (Basel). 2020 Dec 27;13(1):74.
   Google Scholar
• Abo-Aziza FAM, Zaki AA. The impact of confluence on bone marrow mesenchymal stem (BMMSC) proliferation and osteogenic differentiation. Int J Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res. 2017;11(2):121–132.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jensen J, Kraft DC, Lysdahl H, et al. Functionalization of polycaprolactone scaffolds with hyaluronic acid and β-TCP facilitates migration and osteogenic differentiation of human dental pulp stem cells in vitro. Tissue Eng Part A. 2015;21(3-4):729–739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen M, Le DQS, Baatrup A, et al. Self-assembled composite matrix in a hierarchical 3-D scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(5):2244–2255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park SH, Kim TG, Kim HC, et al. Development of dual scale scaffolds via direct polymer melt deposition and electrospinning for applications in tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(5):1198–1207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lara-Padilla H, Mendoza-Buenrostro C, Cardenas D, et al. Influence of controlled cooling in bimodal scaffold fabrication using polymers with different melting temperatures. Materials (Basel, Switzerland). 2017;10(6):640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vyas C, Ates G, Aslan E, et al. Three-Dimensional printing and electrospinning dual-scale polycaprolactone scaffolds with low-density and oriented fibers to promote cell alignment. 3D Print Addit Manuf. 2020;7(3):105–113.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mota C, Puppi D, Dinucci D, et al. Dual-scale polymeric constructs as scaffolds for tissue engineering. Materials (Basel). 2011;4(3):527–542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandakumar A, Barradas A, de Boer J, et al. Combining technologies to create bioactive hybrid scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomatter. 2013;3(2):e23705.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Criscenti G, Longoni A, Di Luca A, et al. Triphasic scaffolds for the regeneration of the bone–ligament interface. Biofabrication. 2016;8(1):015009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellor LF, Nordberg RC, Huebner P, et al. Investigation of multiphasic 3D-bioplotted scaffolds for site-specific chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation of human adipose-derived stem cells for osteochondral tissue engineering applications. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2020;108(5):2017–2030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang GH, Kim M, Kim G. A hybrid PCL/collagen scaffold consisting of solid freeform-fabricated struts and EHD-direct-jet-processed fibrous threads for tissue regeneration. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2015;450:159–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuss MA, Wu S, Wang Y, et al. Prevascularization of 3D printed bone scaffolds by bioactive hydrogels and cell co-culture. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2018;106(5):1788–1798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mekhileri NV, Lim KS, Brown GCJ, et al. Automated 3D bioassembly of micro-tissues for biofabrication of hybrid tissue engineered constructs. Biofabrication. 2018;10(2):024103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirby GTS, White LJ, Steck R, et al. Microparticles for sustained growth factor delivery in the regeneration of critically-sized segmental tibial bone defects. Materials (Basel). 2016 Mar 31;9(4):259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reichert JC, Cipitria A, Epari DR, et al. A tissue engineering solution for segmental defect regeneration in load-bearing long bones. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(141):141ra193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berner A, Reichert JC, Woodruff MA, et al. Autologous vs. allogenic mesenchymal progenitor cells for the reconstruction of critical sized segmental tibial bone defects in aged sheep. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(8):7874–7884.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schantz J-T, Brandwood A, Hutmacher DW, et al. Osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal progenitor cells in computer designed fibrin-polymer-ceramic scaffolds manufactured by fused deposition modeling. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16(9):807–819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong L, Wang S-J, Zhao X-R, et al. 3D-printed poly (ϵ-caprolactone) scaffold integrated with cell-laden chitosan hydrogels for bone tissue engineering. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang S-J, Zhang Z-Z, Jiang D, et al. Thermogel-coated poly(ϵ-caprolactone) composite scaffold for enhanced cartilage tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel). 2016;8(5):200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heo DN, Castro NJ, Lee S-J, et al. Enhanced bone tissue regeneration using a 3D printed microstructure incorporated with a hybrid nano hydrogel. Nanoscale. 2017;9(16):5055–5062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuurman W, Khristov V, Pot MW, et al. Bioprinting of hybrid tissue constructs with tailorable mechanical properties. Biofabrication. 2011;3(2):021001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pati F, Shim J-H, Lee J-S, et al. 3D printing of cell-laden constructs for heterogeneous tissue regeneration. Manuf Lett. 2013;1(1):49–53.
   Google Scholar
• Bae EB, Park KH, Shim JH, et al. Efficacy of rhBMP-2 loaded PCL/β-TCP/bdECM scaffold fabricated by 3D printing technology on bone regeneration. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:2876135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pati F, Jang J, Ha D-H, et al. Printing three-dimensional tissue analogues with decellularized extracellular matrix bioink. Nat Commun. 2014;5:3935–3935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim JH, Kim SE, Park JY, et al. Three-dimensional printing of rhBMP-2-loaded scaffolds with long-term delivery for enhanced bone regeneration in a rabbit diaphyseal defect. Tissue Eng Part A. 2014;20(13-14):1980–1992.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gloria A, Russo T, D'Amora U, et al. Magnetic poly(ϵ-caprolactone)/iron-doped hydroxyapatite nanocomposite substrates for advanced bone tissue engineering. J R Soc Interface. 2013;10(80):20120833.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanes J, Sánchez C, Pamies R, et al. Extrusion of polymer nanocomposites with graphene and graphene derivative nanofillers: an overview of recent developments. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(3):549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barradas A, Yuan H, van Blitterswijk CA, et al. Osteoinductive biomaterials: current knowledge of properties, experimental models and biological mechanisms. Eur Cell Mater. 2011;21(407):29.
   Google Scholar
• Habraken W, Habibovic P, Epple M, et al. Calcium phosphates in biomedical applications: materials for the future? Mater Today. 2016;19(2):69–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galván-Chacón VP, Habibovic P. Deconvoluting the bioactivity of calcium phosphate-based bone graft substitutes: strategies to understand the role of individual material properties. Adv Healthcare Mater. 2017;6(13):1601478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roschger P, Fratzl P, Eschberger J, et al. Validation of quantitative backscattered electron imaging for the measurement of mineral density distribution in human bone biopsies. Bone. 1998;23(4):319–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloebaum RD, Skedros JG, Vajda EG, et al. Determining mineral content variations in bone using backscattered electron imaging. Bone. 1997;20(5):485–490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esposito Corcione C, Gervaso F, Scalera F, et al. Highly loaded hydroxyapatite microsphere/ PLA porous scaffolds obtained by fused deposition modelling. Ceram Int. 2019;45(2, Part B):2803–2810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang W, Shi J, Li W, et al. Morphology, wettability, and mechanical properties of polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds with interconnected pore structures fabricated by a mini-deposition system. Polym Eng Sci. 2012;52(11):2396–2402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding C, Qiao Z, Jiang W, et al. Regeneration of a goat femoral head using a tissue-specific, biphasic scaffold fabricated with CAD/CAM technology. Biomaterials. 2013;34(28):6706–6716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang W, Shi J, Li W, et al. Three dimensional melt-deposition of polycaprolactone/bio-derived hydroxyapatite composite into scaffold for bone repair. J Biomater Sci, Polym Ed. 2013;24(5):539–550.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu J, Xu Y, Li S, et al. Three-dimensional printing of nano hydroxyapatite/poly(ester urea) composite scaffolds with enhanced bioactivity. Biomacromolecules. 2017;18(12):4171–4183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho YS, Choi S, Lee S-H, et al. Assessments of polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite composite scaffold with enhanced biomimetic mineralization by exposure to hydroxyapatite via a 3D-printing system and alkaline erosion. Eur Polym J. 2019;113:340–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho YS, Quan M, Lee S-H, et al. Assessment of osteogenesis for 3D-printed polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite composite scaffold with enhanced exposure of hydroxyapatite using rat calvarial defect model. Compos Sci Technol. 2019;184:107844.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barradas AM, Monticone V, Hulsman M, et al. Molecular mechanisms of biomaterial-driven osteogenic differentiation in human mesenchymal stromal cells. Integr Biol. 2013;5(7):920–931.
   Google Scholar
• Habibovic P, Yuan H, van der Valk CM, et al. 3D microenvironment as essential element for osteoinduction by biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2005;26(17):3565–3575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danoux CBSS, Bassett DC, Othman Z, et al. Elucidating the individual effects of calcium and phosphate ions on hMSCs by using composite materials. Acta Biomater. 2015;17:1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bittner SM, Smith BT, Diaz-Gomez L, et al. Fabrication and mechanical characterization of 3D printed vertical uniform and gradient scaffolds for bone and osteochondral tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2019;90:37–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin YH, Chiu YC, Shen YF, et al. Bioactive calcium silicate/poly-ϵ-caprolactone composite scaffolds 3D printed under mild conditions for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2018;29(1):11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen J, Wang W, Zhai X, et al. 3D-printed nanocomposite scaffolds with tunable magnesium ionic microenvironment induce in situ bone tissue regeneration. Appl Mater Today. 2019;16:493–507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang W, Junior JRP, Nalesso PRL, et al. Engineered 3D printed poly(ε-caprolactone)/graphene scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019;100:759–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim J-H, Kim M-J, Park JY, et al. Three-dimensional printing of antibiotics-loaded poly-ϵ-caprolactone/poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) scaffolds for treatment of chronic osteomyelitis. Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2015;12(5):283–293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moncal KK, Heo DN, Godzik KP, et al. 3D printing of poly (ϵ-caprolactone)/poly (D, L-lactide-co-glycolide)/hydroxyapatite composite constructs for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Res. 2018;33(14):1972–1986.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen X, Gao C, Jiang J, et al. 3D printed porous PLA/nHA composite scaffolds with enhanced osteogenesis and osteoconductivity in vivo for bone regeneration. Biomed Mater. 2019;14(6):065003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Mao X, Du Z, et al. Three dimensional printed macroporous polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for promoting bone formation in a critical-size rat calvarial defect model. Sci Technol Adv Mater. 2016;17(1):136–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyberg E, Rindone A, Dorafshar A, et al. Comparison of 3D-printed poly-ε-caprolactone scaffolds functionalized with tricalcium phosphate, hydroxyapatite, Bio-Oss, or decellularized bone matrix. Tissue Eng, Part A. 2017;23(11–12):503–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang B, Caetano G, Vyas C, et al. Polymer-ceramic composite scaffolds: the effect of hydroxyapatite and β-tri-calcium phosphate. Materials. 2018;11(1):129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dávila J, Freitas M, Inforçatti Neto P, et al. Fabrication of PCL/β-TCP scaffolds by 3D mini-screw extrusion printing. J Appl Polym Sci. 2016;133:43031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruyas A, Lou F, Stahl AM, et al. Systematic characterization of 3D-printed PCL/β-TCP scaffolds for biomedical devices and bone tissue engineering: influence of composition and porosity. J Mater Res. 2018;33(14):1948–1959.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park J, Lee SJ, Jo HH, et al. Fabrication and characterization of 3D-printed bone-like β-tricalcium phosphate/polycaprolactone scaffolds for dental tissue engineering. J Ind Eng Chem. 2017;46:175–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JY, Ahn G, Kim C, et al. Synergistic effects of beta tri-calcium phosphate and porcine-derived decellularized bone extracellular matrix in 3D-printed polycaprolactone scaffold on bone regeneration. Macromol Biosci. 2018;18(6):1800025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuan H, Fernandes H, Habibovic P, et al. Osteoinductive ceramics as a synthetic alternative to autologous bone grafting. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107(31):13614–13619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeo A, Sju E, Rai B, et al. Customizing the degradation and load-bearing profile of 3D polycaprolactone-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds under enzymatic and hydrolytic conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008;87B(2):562–569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lam CXF, Hutmacher DW, Schantz J-T, et al. Evaluation of polycaprolactone scaffold degradation for 6 months in vitro and in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;90(3):906–919.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yeo A, Wong WJ, Khoo HH, et al. Surface modification of PCL-TCP scaffolds improve interfacial mechanical interlock and enhance early bone formation: an in vitro and in vivo characterization. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010;92(1):311–321.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yeo A, Wong WJ, Teoh SH. Surface modification of PCL-TCP scaffolds in rabbit calvaria defects: evaluation of scaffold degradation profile, biomechanical properties and bone healing patterns. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A. 2010;93(4):1358–1367.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim JY, Yoon JJ, Park EK, et al. Cell adhesion and proliferation evaluation of SFF-based biodegradable scaffolds fabricated using a multi-head deposition system. Biofabrication. 2009;1(1):015002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim J-H, Moon T-S, Yun M-J, et al. Stimulation of healing within a rabbit calvarial defect by a PCL/PLGA scaffold blended with TCP using solid freeform fabrication technology. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2012;23(12):2993–3002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Idaszek J, Bruinink A, Święszkowski W. Ternary composite scaffolds with tailorable degradation rate and highly improved colonization by human bone marrow stromal cells. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2015;103(7):2394–2404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meleti Z, Shapiro I, Adams CS. Inorganic phosphate induces apoptosis of osteoblast-like cells in culture. Bone. 2000;27(3):359–366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith BT, Bittner SM, Watson E, et al. Multimaterial dual gradient three-dimensional printing for osteogenic differentiation and spatial segregation. Tissue Eng, Part A. 2020;26(5-6):239–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz-Gomez L, Kontoyiannis PD, Melchiorri AJ, et al. Three-dimensional printing of tissue engineering scaffolds with horizontal pore and composition gradients. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2019;25(7):411–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz-Gomez L, Smith BT, Kontoyiannis PD, et al. Multimaterial segmented fiber printing for gradient tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2019;25(1):12–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaharwar AK, Rivera CP, Wu C-J, et al. Transparent, elastomeric and tough hydrogels from poly(ethylene glycol) and silicate nanoparticles. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(12):4139–4148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Wang S, Li K, et al. Preparation of laponite bioceramics for potential bone tissue engineering applications. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99585.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shie MY, Ding SJ. Integrin binding and MAPK signal pathways in primary cell responses to surface chemistry of calcium silicate cements. Biomaterials. 2013;34(28):6589–6606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Yu W, Ba Z, et al. 3D-printed scaffolds of mesoporous bioglass/gliadin/polycaprolactone ternary composite for enhancement of compressive strength, degradability, cell responses and new bone tissue ingrowth. Int J Nanomedicine. 2018;13:5433–5447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alksne M, Kalvaityte M, Simoliunas E, et al. In vitro comparison of 3D printed polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite and polylactic acid/bioglass composite scaffolds: insights into materials for bone regeneration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020;104:103641.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poh PSP, Hutmacher DW, Holzapfel BM, et al. In vitro and in vivo bone formation potential of surface calcium phosphate-coated polycaprolactone and polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2016;30:319–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marie PJ, Ammann P, Boivin G, et al. Mechanisms of action and therapeutic potential of strontium in bone. Calcif Tissue Int. 2001;69(3):121–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poh PSP, Hutmacher DW, Stevens MM, et al. Fabrication and in vitro characterization of bioactive glass composite scaffolds for bone regeneration. Biofabrication. 2013;5(4):045005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou X, Zhang N, Mankoci S, et al. Silicates in orthopedics and bone tissue engineering materials. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2017;105(7):2090–2102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sidambe AT. Biocompatibility of advanced manufactured titanium implants—a review. Materials (Basel). 2014;7(12):8168–8188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schröder C, Steinbrück A, Müller T, et al. Rapid prototyping for in vitro knee rig investigations of prosthetized knee biomechanics: comparison with cobalt-chromium alloy implant material. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:185142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li L, Gao J, Wang Y. Evaluation of cyto-toxicity and corrosion behavior of alkali-heat-treated magnesium in simulated body fluid. Surf Coat Technol. 2004;185(1):92–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rude RK, Gruber HE, Norton HJ, et al. Dietary magnesium reduction to 25% of nutrient requirement disrupts bone and mineral metabolism in the rat. Bone. 2005;37(2):211–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong HM, Wu S, Chu PK, et al. Low-modulus Mg/PCL hybrid bone substitute for osteoporotic fracture fixation. Biomaterials. 2013;34(29):7016–7032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zberg B, Uggowitzer PJ, Löffler JF. Mgznca glasses without clinically observable hydrogen evolution for biodegradable implants. Nat Mater. 2009;8(11):887–891.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdal-hay A, Raveendran NT, Fournier B, et al. Fabrication of biocompatible and bioabsorbable polycaprolactone/ magnesium hydroxide 3D printed scaffolds: degradation and in vitro osteoblasts interactions. Compos B Eng. 2020;197:108158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanßke F, Bas O, Vaquette C, et al. Via precise interface engineering towards bioinspired composites with improved 3D printing processability and mechanical properties. J Mater Chem B. 2017;5(25):5037–5047.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bas O, Hanßke F, Lim J, et al. Tuning mechanical reinforcement and bioactivity of 3D printed ternary nanocomposites by interfacial peptide-polymer conjugates. Biofabrication. 2019;11(3):035028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson C, Kirkham J. The effect of fluoride on the developing mineralized tissues. J Dent Res. 1990;69(2_suppl):685–691.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Radhakrishnan S, Nagarajan S, Belaid H, et al. Fabrication of 3D printed antimicrobial polycaprolactone scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C. 2021;118:111525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu M, Liu Y, Chen T, et al. Is graphene a promising nano-material for promoting surface modification of implants or scaffold materials in bone tissue engineering? Tissue Eng Part B Reviews. 2014;20(5):477–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eivazzadeh-Keihan R, Maleki A, de la Guardia M, et al. Carbon based nanomaterials for tissue engineering of bone: building new bone on small black scaffolds: a review. J Adv Res. 2019;18:185–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasis D, Tagmatarchis N, Bianco A, et al. Chemistry of carbon nanotubes. Chem Rev. 2006;106(3):1105–1136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Z, Wang L, Li Y, et al. Carbon-based functional nanomaterials: preparation, properties and applications. Compos Sci Technol. 2019;179:10–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang B, Vyas C, Roberts I, et al. Fabrication and characterisation of 3D printed MWCNT composite porous scaffolds for bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019;98:266–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang B, Vyas C, Byun JJ, et al. Aligned multi-walled carbon nanotubes with nanohydroxyapatite in a 3D printed polycaprolactone scaffold stimulates osteogenic differentiation. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;108:110374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang W, Huang B, Byun JJ, et al. Assessment of PCL/carbon material scaffolds for bone regeneration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019;93:52–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang W, Caetano GF, Chiang W-H, et al. Morphological, mechanical and biological assessment of PCL/pristine graphene scaffolds for bone regeneration. Int J Bioprint. 2016;2(2):95–104.
   Google Scholar
• Wang W, Caetano G, Ambler WS, et al. Enhancing the hydrophilicity and cell attachment of 3D printed PCL/graphene scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Materials (Basel). 2016;9(12):992.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caetano GF, Wang W, Chiang W-H, et al. 3D-Printed poly(ε-caprolactone)/graphene scaffolds activated with P1-latex protein for bone regeneration. 3D Print Addit Manuf. 2018;5(2):127–137.
   Google Scholar
• Akhavan O, Ghaderi E, Akhavan A. Size-dependent genotoxicity of graphene nanoplatelets in human stem cells. Biomaterials. 2012;33(32):8017–8025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreyer DR, Park S, Bielawski CW, et al. The chemistry of graphene oxide. Chem Soc Rev. 2010;39(1):228–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuila T, Bose S, Mishra AK, et al. Chemical functionalization of graphene and its applications. Prog Mater Sci. 2012;57(7):1061–1105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unagolla JM, Jayasuriya AC. Enhanced cell functions on graphene oxide incorporated 3D printed polycaprolactone scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019;102:1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belaid H, Nagarajan S, Teyssier C, et al. Development of new biocompatible 3D printed graphene oxide-based scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020;110:110595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Q, Mangadlao JD, Wallat J, et al. 3D printing biocompatible polyurethane/poly(lactic acid)/graphene oxide nanocomposites: anisotropic properties. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2017;9(4):4015–4023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pei S, Cheng H-M. The reduction of graphene oxide. Carbon N Y. 2012;50(9):3210–3228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angulo-Pineda C, Srirussamee K, Palma P, et al. Electroactive 3D printed scaffolds based on percolated composites of polycaprolactone with thermally reduced graphene oxide for antibacterial and tissue engineering applications. Nanomaterials. 2020;10(3):428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAllister MJ, Li J-L, Adamson DH, et al. Single sheet functionalized graphene by oxidation and thermal expansion of graphite. Chem Mater. 2007;19(18):4396–4404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto AM, Goncalves IC, Magalhaes FD. Graphene-based materials biocompatibility: a review. Colloids Surf B. 2013;111:188–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reina G, González-Domínguez JM, Criado A, et al. Promises, facts and challenges for graphene in biomedical applications. Chem Soc Rev. 2017;46(15):4400–4416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma Y, Shen H, Tu X, et al. Assessing in vivo toxicity of graphene materials: current methods and future outlook. Nanomedicine. 2014;9(10):1565–1580.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traub WH, Leonhard B. Heat stability of the antimicrobial activity of sixty-two antibacterial agents. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1995;35(1):149–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J-H, Baik J-M, Yu Y-S, et al. Development of a heat labile antibiotic eluting 3D printed scaffold for the treatment of osteomyelitis. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):7554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa PF, Puga AM, Díaz-Gomez L, et al. Additive manufacturing of scaffolds with dexamethasone controlled release for enhanced bone regeneration. Int J Pharm. 2015;496(2):541–550.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Water JJ, Bohr A, Boetker J, et al. Three-dimensional printing of drug-eluting implants: preparation of an antimicrobial polylactide feedstock material. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104(3):1099–1107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kempin W, Franz C, Koster L-C, et al. Assessment of different polymers and drug loads for fused deposition modeling of drug loaded implants. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2017;115:84–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo EY, Ong S-Y, Khoon Chong MS, et al. Polycaprolactone-based fused deposition modeled mesh for delivery of antibacterial agents to infected wounds. Biomaterials. 2011;32(1):279–287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong J, Li M, Zhou L, et al. The influence of grafted cellulose nanofibers and postextrusion annealing treatment on selected properties of poly(lactic acid) filaments for 3D printing. J Polym Sci Part B Polym Phys. 2017;55(11):847–855.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alemán-Domínguez ME, Giusto E, Ortega Z, et al. Three-dimensional printed polycaprolactone-microcrystalline cellulose scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res, Part B. 2019;107(3):521–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhnt T, Camarero-Espinosa S. Additive manufacturing of nanocellulose based scaffolds for tissue engineering: beyond a reinforcement filler. Carbohydr Polym. 2021;252:117159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wibowo A, Vyas C, Cooper G, et al. 3D printing of polycaprolactone-polyaniline electroactive scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Materials (Basel, Switzerland). 2020;13(3):512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camarero-Espinosa S, Moroni L. Janus 3D printed dynamic scaffolds for nanovibration-driven bone regeneration. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):1–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDermott AM, Herberg S, Mason DE, et al. Recapitulating bone development through engineered mesenchymal condensations and mechanical cues for tissue regeneration. Sci Transl Med. 2019;11(495):eaav7756.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciombor DM, Aaron RK. The role of electrical stimulation in bone repair. Foot Ankle Clin. 2005;10(4):579–593. vii.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hendrikson WJ, Deegan AJ, Yang Y, et al. Influence of additive manufactured scaffold architecture on the distribution of surface strains and fluid flow shear stresses and expected osteochondral cell differentiation. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2017;5:6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrikson WJ, van Blitterswijk CA, Rouwkema J, et al. The use of finite element analyses to design and fabricate three-dimensional scaffolds for skeletal tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2017;5:30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Freeman FE, Pitacco P, van Dommelen LHA, et al. 3D bioprinting spatiotemporally defined patterns of growth factors to tightly control tissue regeneration. Sci Adv. 2020;6(33):eabb5093.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton PD. Melt electrowriting with additive manufacturing principles. Curr Opin Biomed Eng. 2017;2:49–57.
   Google Scholar