Preprint Review Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Synthetic and Marine-Derived Porous Bone Graft Substitutes

Version 1 : Received: 26 June 2018 / Approved: 26 June 2018 / Online: 26 June 2018 (16:05:49 CEST)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Neto, A.S.; Ferreira, J.M.F. Synthetic and Marine-Derived Porous Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering. Materials 2018, 11, 1702. Neto, A.S.; Ferreira, J.M.F. Synthetic and Marine-Derived Porous Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering. Materials 2018, 11, 1702.

Journal reference: Materials 2018, 11, 1702
DOI: 10.3390/ma11091702

Abstract

Bone is a dynamic tissue with the capacity of repair and regeneration in specific conditions. Nevertheless, due to the increased incidence of bone disorders, the need of bone grafts has been growing over the past decades and the development of an ideal bone graft with optimal properties remains a clinical challenge. This review addresses the bone properties (morphology, composition and their repair and regeneration capacity) and puts the main focus on the potential strategies for developing bone repair and regeneration materials. It describes the requirements for designing a suitable scaffold material, types of materials (polymers, ceramics and composites) and techniques to obtain the porous structures (additive manufacturing techniques/robocasting or derived from marine skeletons) for bone tissue engineering applications. The main objective of this review is to gather the knowledge on the materials and methods for the production of scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and highlighting the potential of natural porous structures such as marine skeletons as promising alternative bone graft substitute materials without any further mineralogical changes, or after partial or total transformation into calcium phosphate. The suitability of the marine-derived porous bone graft substitutes for the intended applications will be also discussed.

Subject Areas

Bone tissue engineering; biomaterials; bone scaffolds; additive manufacturing techniques/robocasting; marine-derived biomaterials

Comments (2)

Importance: How significant is the paper to the field?
Outstanding/highlight paper
0%
Significant contribution
100%
Incremental contribution
0%
No contribution
0%
Soundness of evidence/arguments presented:
Conclusions well supported
100%
Most conclusions supported (minor revision needed)
0%
Incomplete evidence (major revision needed)
0%
Hypothesis, unsupported conclusions, or proof-of-principle
0%
Comment 1
Received: 26 June 2018
Commenter: Bohua Sun (Click to see Publons profile: )
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Good work, well done
+ Respond to this comment
Response 1 to Comment 1
Received: 27 June 2018
Commenter: José Maria Fonte Ferreira
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Dear Bohua Sun,

Thank you for your appreciation of our work!

Yours sincerely,
José M.F. Ferreira

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 2
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.