Search results for: calcium deficient hydroxyapatite

Authors: Zeynep Busra Velioglu, Deniz Pulat, Beril Demirbakan, Burak Ozcan, Ece Bayrak, Cevat Erisken

Abstract:

Bone tissue has the ability to perform a wide array of functions including providing posture, load-bearing capacity, protection for the internal organs, initiating hematopoiesis, and maintaining the homeostasis of key electrolytes via calcium/phosphate ion storage. The most common cause for bone defects is extensive trauma and subsequent infection. Bone tissue has the self-healing capability without a scar tissue formation for the majority of the injuries. However, some may result with delayed union or fracture non-union. Such cases include reconstruction of large bone defects or cases of compromised regenerative process as a result of avascular necrosis and osteoporosis. Several surgical methods exist to treat bone defects, including Ilizarov method, Masquelete technique, growth factor stimulation, and bone replacement. Unfortunately, these are technically demanding and come with noteworthy disadvantages such as lengthy treatment duration, adverse effects on the patient’s psychology, repeated surgical procedures, and often long hospitalization times. These limitations associated with surgical techniques make bone substitutes an attractive alternative. Here, it was hypothesized that a 3D printed scaffold will mimic trabecular bone in terms of biomechanical properties and that such scaffolds will support cell attachment and survival. To test this hypothesis, this study aimed at fabricating poly(lactic acid), PLA, structures using 3D printing technology for trabecular bone defects, characterizing the scaffolds and comparing with bovine trabecular bone. Capacity of scaffolds on human bone marrow stem cell (hBMSC) attachment and survival was also evaluated. Cubes with a volume of 1 cm³ having pore sizes of 0.50, 1.00 and 1.25 mm were printed. The scaffolds/grafts were characterized in terms of porosity, contact angle, compressive mechanical properties as well cell response. Porosities of the 3D printed scaffolds were calculated based on apparent densities. For contact angles, 50 µl distilled water was dropped over the surface of scaffolds, and contact angles were measured using ‘Image J’ software. Mechanical characterization under compression was performed on scaffolds and native trabecular bone (bovine, 15 months) specimens using a universal testing machine at a rate of 0.5mm/min. hBMSCs were seeded onto the 3D printed scaffolds. After 3 days of incubation with fully supplemented Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium, the cells were fixed using 2% formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde mixture. The specimens were then imaged under scanning electron microscopy. Cell proliferation was determined by using EZQuant dsDNA Quantitation kit. Fluorescence was measured using microplate reader Spectramax M2 at the excitation and emission wavelengths of 485nm and 535nm, respectively. Findings suggested that porosity of scaffolds with pore dimensions of 0.5mm, 1.0mm and 1.25mm were not affected by pore size, while contact angle and compressive modulus decreased with increasing pore size. Biomechanical characterization of trabecular bone yielded higher modulus values as compared to scaffolds with all pore sizes studied. Cells attached and survived in all surfaces, demonstrating higher proliferation on scaffolds with 1.25mm pores as compared with those of 1mm. Collectively, given lower mechanical properties of scaffolds as compared to native bone, and biocompatibility of the scaffolds, the 3D printed PLA scaffolds of this study appear as candidate substitutes for bone repair and regeneration.

Keywords: 3D printing, biomechanics, bone repair, stem cell

Procedia PDF Downloads 155

Authors: Liane J. Ioannou, Jonathan Serpell, Cino Bendinelli, David Walters, Jenny Gough, Dean Lisewski, Win Meyer-Rochow, Julie Miller, Duncan Topliss, Bill Fleming, Stephen Farrell, Andrew Kiu, James Kollias, Mark Sywak, Adam Aniss, Linda Fenton, Danielle Ghusn, Simon Harper, Aleksandra Popadich, Kate Stringer, David Watters, Susannah Ahern

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There are significant variations in the management, treatment and outcomes of thyroid cancer, particularly in the role of: diagnostic investigation and pre-treatment scanning; optimal extent of surgery (total or hemi-thyroidectomy); use of active surveillance for small low-risk cancers; central lymph node dissections (therapeutic or prophylactic); outcomes following surgery (e.g. recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, hypocalcaemia, hypoparathyroidism); post-surgical hormone, calcium and vitamin D therapy; and provision and dosage of radioactive iodine treatment. A proven strategy to reduce variations in the outcome and to improve survival is to measure and compare it using high-quality clinical registry data. Clinical registries provide the most effective means of collecting high-quality data and are a tool for quality improvement. Where they have been introduced at a state or national level, registries have become one of the most clinically valued tools for quality improvement. To benchmark clinical care, clinical quality registries require systematic measurement at predefined intervals and the capacity to report back information to participating clinical units. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a core set clinical indicators that enable measurement and reporting of quality of care for patients with thyroid cancer. We hypothesise that measuring clinical quality indicators, developed to identify differences in quality of care across sites, will reduce variation and improve patient outcomes and survival, thereby lessening costs and healthcare burden to the Australian community. METHOD: Preparatory work and scoping was conducted to identify existing high quality, clinical guidelines and best practice for thyroid cancer both nationally and internationally, as well as relevant literature. A bi-national panel was invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. Panelists were asked to rate each proposed indicator on a Likert scale of 1–9 in a three-round iterative process. RESULTS: A total of 236 potential quality indicators were identified. One hundred and ninety-two indicators were removed to reflect the data capture by the Australian and New Zealand Thyroid Cancer Registry (ANZTCR) (from diagnosis to 90-days post-surgery). The remaining 44 indicators were presented to the panelists for voting. A further 21 indicators were later added by the panelists bringing the total potential quality indicators to 65. Of these, 21 were considered the most important and feasible indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer, of which 12 were recommended for inclusion in the final set. The consensus indicator set spans the spectrum of care, including: preoperative; surgery; surgical complications; staging and post-surgical treatment planning; and post-surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a core set of quality indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer. This indicator set can be applied as a tool for internal quality improvement, comparative quality reporting, public reporting and research. Inclusion of these quality indicators into monitoring databases such as clinical quality registries will enable opportunities for benchmarking and feedback on best practice care to clinicians involved in the management of thyroid cancer.

Keywords: clinical registry, Delphi survey, quality indicators, quality of care

Procedia PDF Downloads 151