MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283698679 · doi:10.3390/surgeries3030018

Optimizing Design Parameters of PLA 3D-Printed Scaffolds for Bone Defect Repair

2022· article· en· W4283698679 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandrine Dussault, Audrey A. Pitaru, Michael Weber, Lisbet Haglund, Derek H. Rosenzweig, Isabelle Villemure

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgeries · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcGill University Health CentrePolytechnique MontréalShriners Hospitals for Children - CanadaMontreal General HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialRigidity (electromagnetism)ScaffoldCompressive strengthCylinderBiomedical engineeringFinite element methodStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current materials used to fill bone defects (ceramics, cement) either lack strength or do not induce bone repair. The use of biodegradable polymers such as PLA may promote patient healing by stimulating the production of new bone in parallel with a controlled degradation of the scaffold. This project aims to determine the design parameters maximising scaffold mechanical performance in such materials. Starting from a base cylindrical model of 10 mm height and of outer and inner diameters of 10 and 4 mm, respectively, 27 scaffolds were designed. Three design parameters were investigated: pore distribution (crosswise, lengthwise, and eccentric), pore shape (triangular, circular, and square), and pore size (surface area of 0.25 mm2, 0.5625 mm2, and 1 mm2). Using the finite element approach, a compressive displacement (0.05 mm/s up to 15% strain) was simulated on the models and the resulting scaffold stiffnesses (N/mm2) were compared. The models presenting good mechanical behaviors were further printed along two orientations: 0° (cylinder sitting on its base) and 90° (cylinder laying on its side). A total of n = 5 specimens were printed with PLA for each of the retained models and experimentally tested using a mechanical testing machine with the same compression parameters. Rigidity and yield strength were evaluated from the experimental curves. Both numerically and experimentally, the highest rigidity was found in the model with circular pore shape, crosswise pore distribution, small pore size (surface area of 0.25 mm2), and a 90° printing orientation. Its average rigidity reached 961 ± 32 MPa from the mechanical testing and 797 MPa from the simulation, with a yield strength of 42 ± 1.5 MPa. The same model with a printing orientation of 0° resulted in an average rigidity of 515 ± 7 MPa with a yield strength of 32 ± 1.6 MPa. Printing orientation and pore size were found to be the most influential design parameters on rigidity. The developed design methodology should accelerate the identification of effective scaffolds for future in vitro and in vivo studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurgeriesSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207