Abstract
The aim of the present paper is to give an up-to date on computer aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) additive techniques and synthetic polymers for bone reconstruction in the maxillofacial region. Additive manufacturing represents a promising field for future research in bone replacement/regeneration. However, standard guidelines for mimicking clinical environment with the different bone characteristics are strongly required. The rapid prototyping techniques, particularly, bioprinting allows the construct of 3D living functional tissues able to replace, in the near future, large defects caused by tumor excision, trauma, clefts or infections, limiting the autogenous bone graft requirement.
Highlights
The aim of the present paper is to give an up-to date on computer aided design and manufacturing (CAD/ CAM) additive techniques and synthetic polymers for bone reconstruction in the maxillofacial region
The scaffold component plays an important role, being expected to support cell colonization, migration, growth and differentiation, so that it guides the development of the required tissue and, in the meantime, provides sufficient initial mechanical strength and stiffness to substitute for the mechanical function of the diseased or damaged bone to be replaced [22]
It acts as a temporary matrix for cell proliferation and extracellular matrix deposition, with consequent bone ingrowths until the new bony tissue is totally restored/regenerated [14,23,24]
Summary
The aim of the present paper is to give an up-to date on computer aided design and manufacturing (CAD/ CAM) additive techniques and synthetic polymers for bone reconstruction in the maxillofacial region. Additive manufacturing represents a promising field for future research in bone replacement/regeneration. The rapid prototyping techniques, bioprinting allows the construct of 3D living functional tissues able to replace, in the near future, large defects caused by tumor excision, trauma, clefts or infections, limiting the autogenous bone graft requirement. Autogenous grafting has several limitations related to the bone volume requested (e.g. for craniofacial defects reconstruction) and the harvesting process. Synthetic bone substitutes [8], mostly made of hp[3hy]do, sraoprexhyaaatnepo(aβstti-etTeoCcP(,oHCnAad)3u(,PcCtOiav4e1)02(awPltOiethr4n)r6ah(toOivmHeb)to2ohobeordtβhra-atlrusittcroualoclctguiouruems) and allogenic graft options, with wide availability, comparatively low cost and absence of risks such as donor site morbidity and viral transmission [9], but usually lacking of osteogenic or osteoinductive activity [10,11,12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
