Metal porous structures are a common treatment for bone tissue loss when the loss exceeds the self-repair capacity of the human body. The structural characteristics, mechanical properties, and biological behavior of scaffold biomaterials exert a significant influence on the formation of new bone cells. The objective of this study was to ascertain the mechanical and cell biological behavior of scaffold structures with four distinct porosities (60%, 70%, 80%, and 90%). Scaffold structures with a diamond lattice unit cell were manufactured by the selective laser melting method using a CoCr alloy powder with a diameter of 4 mm and a height of 5 mm and were then subjected to a static compression test. Subsequently, human gingival fibroblast cells were seeded into each sample via the cell culture process, and cell formation was observed. According to the results obtained from the compression test, the sample with 60% porosity demonstrated optimal mechanical performance and effective modulus of elasticity. In the cell culture process, the sample with 60% porosity exhibited the highest adherence rate.
KarageorgiouVKaplanD.Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials2005; 26: 5474–5491.
2.
GroeneveldEHJVan Den BerghJPAHolzmannP, et al. Mineralization processes in demineralized bone matrix grafts in human maxillary sinus floor elevations. J Biomed Mater Res1999; 48: 393–402.
3.
Van BaelSChaiYCTruscelloS, 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 Biomater2012; 8: 2824–2834.
4.
HenkelJWoodruffMAEpariDR, et al. Bone regeneration based on tissue engineering conceptions – a 21st century perspective. Bone Res2013; 1: 216–248.
5.
RosetiLParisiVPetrettaM, et al. Scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: state of the art and new perspectives. Mater Sci Eng C2017; 78: 1246–1262.
6.
ArabnejadSBurnett JohnstonRPuraJA, et al. High-strength porous biomaterials for bone replacement: a strategy to assess the interplay between cell morphology, mechanical properties, bone ingrowth and manufacturing constraints. Acta Biomater2016; 30: 345–356.
7.
KowalczykP.Design optimization of cementless femoral hip prostheses using finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng2001; 123: 396–402.
8.
GorguluarslanRMChoiSKSaldanaCJ.Uncertainty quantification and validation of 3D lattice scaffolds for computer-aided biomedical applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2017; 71: 428–440.
9.
Rodríguez-MontañoÓLCortés-RodríguezCJUvaAE, et al. Comparison of the mechanobiological performance of bone tissue scaffolds based on different unit cell geometries. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2018; 83: 28–45.
10.
ZhangBPeiXZhouC, et al. The biomimetic design and 3D printing of customized mechanical properties porous Ti6Al4V scaffold for load-bearing bone reconstruction. Mater Des2018; 152: 30–39.
11.
DuYLiangHXieD, et al. Finite element analysis of mechanical behavior, permeability of irregular porous scaffolds and lattice-based porous scaffolds. Mater Res Express2019; 6: 105407.
12.
KolkenHMADe JongeCPVan Der SlotenT, et al. Additively manufactured space-filling meta-implants. Acta Biomater2021; 125: 345–357.
13.
HedayatiRAhmadiSMLietaertK, et al. Isolated and modulated effects of topology and material type on the mechanical properties of additively manufactured porous biomaterials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2018; 79: 254–263.
14.
LuYCuiZChengL, et al. Quantifying the discrepancies in the geometric and mechanical properties of the theoretically designed and additively manufactured scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2020; 112: 104080.
15.
YanCHaoLHusseinA, et al. Ti–6Al–4V triply periodic minimal surface structures for bone implants fabricated via selective laser melting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2015; 51: 61–73.
16.
KadkhodapourJMontazerianHDarabiACh, et al. Failure mechanisms of additively manufactured porous biomaterials: effects of porosity and type of unit cell. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2015; 50: 180–191.
17.
GattoMLCerqueniGGroppoR, et al. Improved biomechanical behavior of 316L graded scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration produced by laser powder bed fusion. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2023; 144: 105989.
18.
CaiazzoFAlfieriVGuillenDG, et al. Metal functionally graded gyroids: additive manufacturing, mechanical properties, and simulation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2022; 123: 2501–2518.
19.
CaravaggiPLiveraniELeardiniA, et al. CoCr porous scaffolds manufactured via selective laser melting in orthopedics: topographical, mechanical, and biological characterization. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2019; 107: 2343–2353.
20.
AkbayÖCBahçeE. Investigation of mechanical performance of hybrid design porous structures manufactured from CoCr alloy. Prog Addit Manuf. Epub ahead of print 22 October 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s40964-024-00842-3.
21.
RehmanMWangYIshfaqK, et al. A comparative bio-mechanical performance assessment of additively manufactured bone scaffolds using different beta Ti alloys and Gyroid based cellular structure. J Mater Res Technol2025; 35: 1565–1585.
22.
AufaANHassanMZIsmailZ, et al. Current trends in additive manufacturing of selective laser melting for biomedical implant applications. J Mater Res Technol2024; 31: 213–243.
23.
LuYZhouYLiangX, et al. Early bone ingrowth of Cu-bearing CoCr scaffolds produced by selective laser melting: an in vitro and in vivo study. Mater Des2023; 228: 111822.
24.
CardosoLFrittonSPGailaniG, et al. Advances in assessment of bone porosity, permeability and interstitial fluid flow. J Biomech2013; 46: 253–265.
25.
PengXHuoYZhangG, et al. Controlled mechanical and mass-transport properties of porous scaffolds through hollow strut. Int J Mech Sci2023; 248: 108202.
26.
WangXZhangLSongB, et al. Anisotropic mechanical and mass-transport performance of Ti6Al4V plate-lattice scaffolds prepared by laser powder bed fusion. Acta Biomater2022; 148: 374–388.
27.
ZhaoXHuDAWuD, et al. Applications of biocompatible scaffold materials in stem cell-based cartilage tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2021; 9: 603444.
28.
Eftekhar AshtianiRAlamMTavakolizadehS, et al. The role of biomaterials and biocompatible materials in implant-supported dental prosthesis. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med2021; 2021: 1–9.
29.
TahmasebiEAlamMYazdanianM, et al. Current biocompatible materials in oral regeneration: a comprehensive overview of composite materials. J Mater Res Technol2020; 9: 11731–11755.
30.
RadhakrishnanASreekumaranSAnjaliS, et al. Chapter 20 – Emerging strategies in bone tissue engineering. In: SharmaCPChandyTThomasV, et al. (eds) Tissue engineering. New York, NY: Academic Press, pp.469–492.
31.
BartolomeuFCostaMMAlvesN, et al. Engineering the elastic modulus of NiTi cellular structures fabricated by selective laser melting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2020; 110: 103891.
32.
KaramanDGhahramanzadeh AslH.Biomechanical behavior of diamond lattice scaffolds obtained by two different design approaches with similar porosity; a numerical investigation with FEM and CFD analysis. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2022; 236: 794–810.
33.
TunaSHKaracaEAslanİ, et al. Evaluation of corrosion resistance of Co-Cr alloys fabricated with different metal laser sintering systems. J Adv Prosthodont2020; 12: 114.
34.
Dolfini AlexandrinoLMartinez AntunesLHJardini MunhozAL, et al. Mechanical and surface properties of Co–Cr alloy produced by additive manufacturing for removable partial denture frameworks. J Prosthet Dent2023; 130: 780–785.
35.
Celik UzunerS. Mitochondrial DNA methylation misleads global DNA methylation detected by antibody-based methods. Anal Biochem2020; 601: 113789.
36.
LiuQWeiFCoathupM, et al. Effect of porosity and pore shape on the mechanical and biological properties of additively manufactured bone scaffolds. Adv Healthc Mater2023; 12: 2301111.
37.
GibsonLJAshbyMF.Cellular solids: structure and properties. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
38.
ZhaoYWuQWuL.Quasi-static compressive mechanical properties of multilayer micro-lattice biomaterials for skull repair. Mater Des2022; 220: 110871.
39.
FanZHuangGLuY, et al. Full compression response of FG-based scaffolds with varying porosity via an effective numerical scheme. Int J Mech Sci2022; 223: 107294.
40.
LiJLiuYZhangY, et al. Biophysical and biochemical cues of biomaterials guide mesenchymal stem cell behaviors. Front Cell Dev Biol2021; 9: 640388.
41.
BelloABKimDKimD, et al. Engineering and functionalization of gelatin biomaterials: from cell culture to medical applications. Tissue Eng Part B Rev2020; 26: 164–180.
42.
HowlettCREvansMDMWalshWR, et al. Mechanism of initial attachment of cells derived from human bone to commonly used prosthetic materials during cell culture. Biomaterials1994; 15: 213–222.
43.
YamazoeHUemuraTTanabeT.Facile cell patterning on an albumin-coated surface. Langmuir2008; 24: 8402–8404.
44.
HernandezJLWoodrowKA.Medical applications of porous biomaterials: features of porosity and tissue-specific implications for biocompatibility. Adv Healthc Mater2022; 11: 2102087.
