Biomechanical and functional comparison of moulded and 3D printed medical silicones.

Biocompatibility Implants In vitro In vivo Mechanical properties Silicones

Journal

Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials
ISSN: 1878-0180
Titre abrégé: J Mech Behav Biomed Mater
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101322406

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2021
Historique:
received: 15 10 2020
revised: 09 06 2021
accepted: 12 06 2021
pubmed: 5 7 2021
medline: 13 8 2021
entrez: 4 7 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Modern 3D printing of implantable devices provides an important opportunity for the development of personalized implants with good anatomical fit. Nevertheless, 3D printing of silicone has been challenging and the recent advances in technology are provided by the systems which can print medical grade silicone via extrusion. However, the potential impacts of the 3D printing process of silicone on its biomechanical properties has not been studied in sufficient detail. Therefore, the present study compares 3D printed and moulded silicone structures for their cytotoxicity, surface roughness, biomechanical properties, and in vivo tissue reaction. The 3D printing process creates increased nanoscale roughness and noticeably changes microscale topography. Neither the presence of these features nor the differences in processes were found to result in an increase in cytotoxicity or tissue reaction for 3D printed structures, exhibiting limited inflammatory reaction and cell viability above the threshold values. On the contrary, the biomechanical properties have demonstrated significant differences in static and dynamic conditions, and in thermal expansion. Our results demonstrate that 3D printing can be used for establishing a better biomechanical microenvironment for the surrounding tissue of the implant particularly for fragile soft tissue like epithelial mucosa without having any negative effect on the cytotoxicity or in vivo reaction to silicone. For engineering of the implants, however, one must consider the differences in mechanical properties to result in correct and personalized geometry and proper physical interaction with tissues.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34218017
pii: S1751-6161(21)00327-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104649
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Silicones 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

104649

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Auteurs

Alexandra Zühlke (A)

Aalto University Foundation, Espoo, Finland. Electronic address: alexandra.zuhlke@aalto.fi.

Michael Gasik (M)

Aalto University Foundation, Espoo, Finland; Seqvera Ltd. Oy, Helsinki, Finland.

Nihal Engin Vrana (NE)

Spartha Medical SAS, Strasbourg, France.

Celine Blandine Muller (CB)

INSERM, Strasbourg, France.

Julien Barthes (J)

INSERM, Strasbourg, France.

Yevgen Bilotsky (Y)

Seqvera Ltd. Oy, Helsinki, Finland.

Edwin Courtial (E)

3dFAB, Lyon, France.

Christophe Marquette (C)

3dFAB, Lyon, France.

Articles similaires

Vancomycin Polyesters Anti-Bacterial Agents Models, Theoretical Drug Liberation

Characterization of 3D printed composite for final dental restorations.

Lucas Eigi Borges Tanaka, Camila da Silva Rodrigues, Manassés Tércio Vieira Grangeiro et al.
1.00
Composite Resins Materials Testing Printing, Three-Dimensional Surface Properties Flexural Strength

Personalized bioceramic grafts for craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration.

Ana Beatriz G de Carvalho, Maedeh Rahimnejad, Rodrigo L M S Oliveira et al.
1.00
Humans Bone Regeneration Ceramics Printing, Three-Dimensional Tissue Scaffolds

3D-printed tooth for caries excavation.

Lisanne Carnier, Michael Del Hougne, Marc Schmitter et al.
1.00
Humans Printing, Three-Dimensional Dental Caries X-Ray Microtomography Dental Cavity Preparation

Classifications MeSH