3.1. Geometrical properties of the scaffolds
The geometrical properties of the fabricated scaffolds were examined by optical microscope shown in Figure 4. Furthermore, the pore density and porosity were determined. The results are given in Table 1.
Radial gradient scaffolds as bone implants mimic human bone because they have a diverse bone geometry that ranges from cortical bone to cancellous bone. As shown in Figure 4, G100-40-20, has three porosity gradient. Center zone have larger pores, aids the passage of living tissue and nutrition through the bone marrow, enhances vein generation. Surface zone mimic human cortical bone as exhibiting higher mechanical properties and strengthening the scaffold. Transition zone can be used for mimicking trabecular bone. In this way, radial gradient scaffold design may meet many properties of bones in terms of biological and mechanical properties. The thicknesses of these zones can be changed according to patient’s demands.
3.2. Mechanical properties of the scaffolds
Tensile test results of scaffolds are displayed in Table 1 and Figure 5. According to results G100-40-20 scaffold showed enhanced mechanical properties over the G100-20 and G100-40. Due to its lower porosity, G100 conventional homogenous scaffold had highest mechanical properties. As can be seen from Figure 4, all structures exhibit a porosity that is interconnected. This interconnected porosity is very important factor for tissue ingrowth. It is indicated from Table 1 and Figure 5 that scaffold with radial gradient porosity exhibits improved strain, while the conventional homogenous scaffolds show brittle failure.
The percentage of void area in a scaffold is known as porosity, and it is an important aspect in scaffold design and bone formation. More porous structure provide living tissue transition and nutrition transition, enhances vein generation because porous structures have larger specific surface area, while less porous zone may meet the mechanical strength of the scaffold when implanted. According to the compression test results, the mechanical properties of the scaffolds are reduced by porosity. Compressive stress increased with decreasing porosity. Larger pores can help to minimize the stress shielding of a porous scaffold by lowering the Young’s modulus [8].
The mechanical properties of dense scaffolds (G100) are high but the bone ingrowth properties are poor. Porous materials, on the contrary, have a high biological performance but a low mechanical strength (G40-G20). Porous materials have a high pore surface area to bulk volume, allowing cells to attach and proliferate over a vast surface area. If the porous material is bioactive, the large pore surface area also suggest there is a significant bone-material interfacial bonding area [7-9].
3.3. MTT Cell Proliferation Assays of the scaffolds
The scaffolds’ biocompatibility was tested over a 24-hour period. Cell proliferation assays are depicted in Figure 6. The increase in absorbance is directly related to the increasing number of cells in all groups throughout the culture period.
Radial gradient scaffolds as bone implants mimic human bone because they have a diverse bone geometry that ranges from cortical bone to cancellous bone. Center zone have larger pores, aids not only cell growth, but also the passage of nutrients and metabolic waste. Surface zone mimic human cortical bone as exhibiting higher mechanical properties and strengthening the scaffold. Transition zone can be used for mimicking trabecular bone [9].
The homogeneous G40 and G20 scaffolds showed higher porosity then the graded porous scaffolds. The amount of void space in a scaffold is known as porosity, and it plays an important role in bio-scaffold design in vitro and bone formation in vivo [8,9]. According to the results, even though G20 had the highest porosity, it did not have the highest cell proliferation. The G100-40-20 graded scaffold gave highest cell proliferation. Because, the mean pore size of scaffolds for tissue engineering is critical. If pores are too small, cells are unable to move towards the center of the construct, limiting nutrition diffusion and waste removal. Pores that are too large, on the other hand, reduce the available specific surface area, restricting cell attachment [17].