Published: November 01, 2007
Joy P. Dunkers, Stefan D. Leigh, David Dean, M Cooke, Richard Ketcham, Marcus T. Cicerone
The motivation for the work is to rank candidate reference scaffolds by quality metrics in a systematic and quantitative manner by screening several microstructural descriptors of importance. We chose total pore volume, pore volume distribution, and pore size distribution as the descriptors of interest. The goal of this paper is to establish a methodology to answer the following: 1. How accurately do the fabricated scaffolds replicate the model? 2. How uniform in structure are the fabricated scaffolds? We describe the process by which we address these questions for the Type 1 candidate reference scaffold. Type 1 candidate reference scaffold refers to those provided by D. Dean and M. Cooke at Case Western Reserve University. First, we built a model scaffold using the computer aided design (CAD) template.This is our ideal structure to which the manufactured parts will be compared. Second, we derived theoretical values for the pore volume and pore size from known unit cell dimensions.We next ran the 3D image quantitation on the model scaffold to evaluate any bias the analysis itself may have on the results. We then performed the 3D image quantitation on the image sets taken using X-ray micro-computed tomography from three scaffolds manufactured using rapid prototyping. The pore volume and pore size distribution were compared to the model using a statistic called variational distance. The results of such an analysis enable us to score and rank the parts according to how accurately they replicate the model. We also provide a score for part uniformity.
Citation: ASTM Journal of Testing and Evaluation
Pub Type: Journals
geometry, pore length, pore volume, reference scaffold, structure, tissue engineering, variational distance
Created November 01, 2007, Updated February 19, 2017