Abstract
In this work, braided carbon fiber reinforced carbon matrix composites (3D-C/C composites) are prepared by chemical vapor infiltration process. Their composite structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and in vivo experiments are investigated and compared with those of traditional 2.5D-C/C composites and titanium alloys TC4. The results show that 3D-C/C composites are composed of reinforced braided carbon fiber bundles and pyrolytic carbon matrix and provide 51% open pores with a size larger than 100 μm for tissue adhesion and growth. The Young’s modulus of 3D-C/C composites is about 5 GPa, much smaller than those of 2.5D-C/C composites and TC4, while close to the autogenous bone. 3D-C/C composites have a higher tensile strength (167 MPa) and larger elongation (5.0%) than 2.5D-C/C composites (81 MPa and 0.7%), and do not show obvious degradation after 1 × 106 cyclic tensile loading. The 3D-C/C composites display good biocompatibility and have almost no artifacts on CT imaging. The in vivo experiment reveals that 3D-C/C composites artificial ribs implanted in dogs do not show displacement or fracture in 1 year, and there are no obvious proliferation and inflammation in the soft tissues around 3D-C/C composites implant. Our findings demonstrate that 3D-C/C composites are suitable for chest wall reconstruction and present great potentials in artificial bones.
Highlights
In this work, braided carbon fiber reinforced carbon matrix composites (3D-C/C composites) are prepared by chemical vapor infiltration process
The shape of fiber braids was preserved after infiltration, which leads to a very rough surface on 3D-C/C composites (Supplementary Fig. S1a)
It could be seen that pores in 3D-C/C composites cut through the sample, while those in 2.5D-C/C composites are on the surface or inside the sample
Summary
In this work, braided carbon fiber reinforced carbon matrix composites (3D-C/C composites) are prepared by chemical vapor infiltration process Their composite structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and in vivo experiments are investigated and compared with those of traditional 2.5D-C/C composites and titanium alloys TC4. Stainless-steel plate and titanium alloy were adopted for chest wall reconstruction[3] These commercialized materials have some drawbacks in terms of surgical recovery. Reconstruction, the materials should have a tensile strength and Young’s modulus ranged from 60 to 160 MPa and 3 to 30 GPa, r espectively[10] They should have a large contact area with cortical bone to promote bone regeneration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
