BACKGROUND: Collagen-based scaffolds provide a promising option for the treatment of bone defects. One of the key parameters of such scaffolds consists of porosity, including pore size. However, to date, no agreement has been found with respect to the methodology for pore size evaluation. Since the determination of the exact pore size value is not possible, the comparison of the various methods applied is complicated. Hence, this study focuses on the comparison of two widely-used methods for the characterization of porosity-scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). METHODS: 7 types of collagen-based composite scaffold models were prepared by means of lyophilization and collagen cross-linking. Micro-CT analysis was performed in 3D and in 2D (pore size parameters were: major diameter, mean thickness, biggest inner circle diameter and area-equivalent circle diameter). Afterwards, pore sizes were analyzed in the same specimens by an image analysis of SEM microphotographs. The results were statistically evaluated. The comparison of the various approaches to the evaluation of pore size was based on coefficients of variance and the semi-quantitative assessment of selected qualities (e.g. the potential for direct 3D analysis, whole specimen analysis, non-destructivity). RESULTS: The pore size values differed significantly with respect to the parameters applied. Median values of pore size values were ranging from 20 to 490 µm. The SEM values were approximately 3 times higher than micro-CT 3D values for each specimen. The Mean thickness was the most advantageous micro-CT 2D approach. Coefficient of variance revealed no differences among pore size parameters (except major diameter). The semi-quantitative comparison approach presented pore size parameters in descending order with regard to the advantages thereof as follows: (1) micro-CT 3D, (2) mean thickness and SEM, (3) biggest inner circle diameter, major diameter and area equivalent circle diameter. CONCLUSION: The results indicated that micro-CT 3D evaluation provides the most beneficial overall approach. Micro-CT 2D analysis (mean thickness) is advantageous in terms of its time efficacy. SEM is still considered as gold standard for its widespread use and high resolution. However, exact comparison of pore size analysis in scaffold materials remains a challenge.

Department of Composites and Carbon Materials Institute of Rock Structure and Mechanics Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Prague 8 Czech Republic

Department of Mechanics Biomechanics and Mechatronics Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Czech Technical University Prague Prague 6 Czech Republic

Institute of Anatomy 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague 2 Czech Republic

Institute of Dental Medicine 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University and General University Hospital Prague Kateřinská 32 128 01 Prague 2 Czech Republic

Institute of Pathological Physiology 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague 2 Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Polo-Corrales L, Latorre-Esteves M, Ramirez-Vick JE. Scaffold design for bone regeneration. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2014;14(1):15–56. doi: 10.1166/jnn.2014.9127. PubMed DOI PMC

Billström GH. Application of scaffolds for bone regeneration strategies: current trends and future directions. Injury. 2013 PubMed

Giannoudis PV, Einhorn TA, Marsh D. Fracture healing: the diamond concept. Injury. 2005;38(Suppl 4):S3–S6. PubMed

Liu X, Ma PX. Polymeric scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Ann Biomed Eng. 2004;32(3):477–486. doi: 10.1023/B:ABME.0000017544.36001.8e. PubMed DOI

Sultana N, Hassan MI, Lim MM. Composite synthetic scaffolds for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015.

Gregor A, Filová E, Novák M, Kronek J, Chlup H, Buzgo M, Blahnová V, Lukášová V, Bartoš M, Nečas A, Hošek J. Designing of PLA scaffolds for bone tissue replacement fabricated by ordinary commercial 3D printer. J Biol Eng. 2017 PubMed PMC

Gomez S, Vlad MD, Lopez J, Fernandez E. Design and properties of 3D scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2016 PubMed

Jones CA. Assessment of bone in growth into porous biomaterials using MICRO-CT. Biomaterials. 2007;28:2491–2504. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.01.046. PubMed DOI

Mastrogiacomo M, Scaglione S, Martinetti R, Dolcini L, Beltrame F, Cancedda R, Quarto R. Role of scaffold internal structure on in vivo bone formation in macroporous calcium phosphate bioceramics. Biomaterials. 2006 PubMed

Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials. 2005;26:5474–5491. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002. PubMed DOI

Ho ST, Hutmacher DW. A comparison of micro CT with other techniques used in the characterization of scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2006;27(8):1362–1376. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.08.035. PubMed DOI

Suchý T, Šupová M, Sauerová P, Verdánová M, Sucharda Z, Rýglová Š, Žaloudková M, Sedláček R, Hubálek Kalbáčová M. The effects of different cross-linking conditions on collagen-based nanocomposite scaffolds—an in vitro evaluation using mesenchymal stem cells. Biomed Mater. 2015 PubMed

Chan BP, So KF. Photochemical crosslinking improves the physicochemical properties of collagen scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2005;75(3):689–701. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.30469. PubMed DOI

Bartoš M, Suchý T, Tonar Z, Foltán R, Hubálek Kalbáčová M. Micro-CT in tissue engineering scaffolds designed for bone regeneration: principles and application. Ceramics-Silikáty. 2018;62(2):194–199.

Schladitz K. Quantitative micro-CT. J Microsc. 2011 PubMed

Landis EN, Keane DT. X-ray microtomography. Mater Charact. 2010;61:1305–1316. doi: 10.1016/j.matchar.2010.09.012. DOI

Offendu GS, Ashworth JC, Cameron RE, Oyen ML. Structural determinants of hydration, mechanics and fluid flow in freeze-dried collagen scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2016;41:193–203. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.05.024. PubMed DOI

Suchý T, Šupová M, Bartoš M, Sedláček R, Piola M, Soncini M, Fiore GB, Sauerová P, Hubálek Kalbáčová M. Dry versus hydrated collagen scaffolds: are dry states representative of hydrated states? J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2018;29(3):20. doi: 10.1007/s10856-017-6024-2. PubMed DOI

Žídek J, Vojtová L, Abdel-Mohsen AM, Chmelík J, Zikmund T, Brtniková J, Jakubíček R, Zubal L, Jan J, Kaiser J. Accurate micro-computed tomography imaging of pore spaces in collagen-based scaffold. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2016 PubMed

Stock SR. Microcomputed tomography: methodology and applications. Florida: CRC Press; 2008.

Murugan R, Ramakrishna S, Panduranga RK. Nanoporous hydroxy-carbonate apatite scaffold made of natural bone. Mater Lett. 2006

Rýglová Š, Braun M, Suchý T. Collagen and its modifications—crucial aspect with concern to its processing and analysis. Macromol Mater Eng. 2017

Jirik M, Bartos M, Tomasek P, Maleckova A, Kural T, Horakova J, Lukas D, Suchy T, Kochova P, Hubalek Kalbacova M, Kralickova M, Tonar Z. Generating standardized image data for testing and calibrating quantification of volumes, surfaces, lengths and object counts in fibrous and porous materials using X-ray microtomography. Microsc Res Tech. 2018;81(6):551–568. doi: 10.1002/jemt.23011. PubMed DOI

Kemppainen JM, Hollister SJ. Differential effects of designed scaffold permeability on chondrogenesis by chondrocytes and bone marrow stromal cells. Biomaterials. 2010 PubMed

Karp JM, Shoichet MS, Davies JE. Bone formation on two-dimensional poly(dl-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) films and three-dimensional PLGA tissue engineering scaffolds in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003;64(2):388–396. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.10420. PubMed DOI

Ya-Bo Y, Wei Q, Tian-Xia Q, Ee-Chon T, Wei L. The effect of threshold value on the architectural parameters and stiffness of human cancellous bone in micro-CT analysis. J Mech Med Biol. 2012

Hara T, Tanck E, Homminga J, Huiskes R. The influence of microcomputed tomography threshold variations on the assessment of structural and mechanical trabecular bone properties. Bone. 2002;31(1):107–109. doi: 10.1016/S8756-3282(02)00782-2. PubMed DOI

Boas FE, Fleischmann D. CT artifacts: causes and reduction techniques. Imaging Med. 2012

Various Simulated Body Fluids Lead to Significant Differences in Collagen Tissue Engineering Scaffolds