Background: Bone grafting has been considered the gold standard for hard tissue reconstructive surgery and is widely used for large mandibular defect reconstruction. However, the midface encompasses delicate structures that are surrounded by a complex bone architecture, which makes bone grafting using traditional methods very challenging. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a developing technology that is derived from the evolution of additive manufacturing. It enables precise development of a scaffold from different available biomaterials that mimic the shape, size, and dimension of a defect without relying only on the surgeon’s skills and capabilities, and subsequently, may enhance surgical outcomes and, in turn, patient satisfaction and quality of life.ReviewThis review summarizes different biomaterial classes that can be used in 3D bioprinters as bioinks to fabricate bone scaffolds, including polymers, bioceramics, and composites. It also describes the advantages and limitations of the three currently used 3D bioprinting technologies: inkjet bioprinting, micro-extrusion, and laser-assisted bioprinting. Conclusions Although 3D bioprinting technology is still in its infancy and requires further development and optimization both in biomaterials and techniques, it offers great promise and potential for facial reconstruction with improved outcome.

Background: Bone grafting has been considered the gold standard for hard tissue reconstructive surgery and is widely used for large mandibular defect reconstruction. However, the midface encompasses delicate structures that are surrounded by a complex bone architecture, which makes bone grafting using traditional methods very challenging. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a developing technology that is derived from the evolution of additive manufacturing. It enables precise development of a scaffold from different available biomaterials that mimic the shape, size, and dimension of a defect without relying only on the surgeon’s skills and capabilities, and subsequently, may enhance surgical outcomes and, in turn, patient satisfaction and quality of life.ReviewThis review summarizes different biomaterial classes that can be used in 3D bioprinters as bioinks to fabricate bone scaffolds, including polymers, bioceramics, and composites. It also describes the advantages and limitations of the three currently used 3D bioprinting technologies: inkjet bioprinting, micro-extrusion, and laser-assisted bioprinting. Conclusions Although 3D bioprinting technology is still in its infancy and requires further development and optimization both in biomaterials and techniques, it offers great promise and potential for facial reconstruction with improved outcome.

Objective: The aim of this study was to introduce a gelatin/bovine serum albumin (BSA) tissue standard, which provides dissolution properties identical to those of biological tissues. Further, the study evaluated whether the utilization of endodontic activating devices led to enhanced phantom dissolution rates. Materials and Methods: Bovine pulp tissue was obtained to determine a benchmark of tissue dissolution. The surface area and mass of samples were held constant while the ratio of gelatin and BSA were varied, ranging from 7.5% to 10% gelatin and 5% BSA. Each sample was placed in an individual test tube that was filled with an appropriate sodium hypochlorite solution for 1, 3, and 5 minutes, and then removed from the solution, blotted dry, and weighed again. The remaining tissue was calculated as the percent of initial tissue to determine the tissue dissolution rate. A radiopaque agent (sodium diatrizoate) and a fluorescent dye (methylene blue) were added to the phantom to allow easy quantification of phantom dissolution in a canal block model when activated using ultrasonic (EndoUltra) or sonic (EndoActivator) energy. Results: The 9% gelatin + 5% BSA phantom showed statistically equivalent dissolution to bovine pulp tissue at all time intervals. Furthermore, the EndoUltra yielded significantly more phantom dissolution in the canal block than the EndoActivator or syringe irrigation. Conclusions Our phantom is comparable to biological tissue in terms of tissue dissolution and could be utilized for in vitro tests due to its injectability and detectability.

Objective: The aim of this study was to introduce a gelatin/bovine serum albumin (BSA) tissue standard, which provides dissolution properties identical to those of biological tissues. Further, the study evaluated whether the utilization of endodontic activating devices led to enhanced phantom dissolution rates. Materials and Methods: Bovine pulp tissue was obtained to determine a benchmark of tissue dissolution. The surface area and mass of samples were held constant while the ratio of gelatin and BSA were varied, ranging from 7.5% to 10% gelatin and 5% BSA. Each sample was placed in an individual test tube that was filled with an appropriate sodium hypochlorite solution for 1, 3, and 5 minutes, and then removed from the solution, blotted dry, and weighed again. The remaining tissue was calculated as the percent of initial tissue to determine the tissue dissolution rate. A radiopaque agent (sodium diatrizoate) and a fluorescent dye (methylene blue) were added to the phantom to allow easy quantification of phantom dissolution in a canal block model when activated using ultrasonic (EndoUltra) or sonic (EndoActivator) energy. Results: The 9% gelatin + 5% BSA phantom showed statistically equivalent dissolution to bovine pulp tissue at all time intervals. Furthermore, the EndoUltra yielded significantly more phantom dissolution in the canal block than the EndoActivator or syringe irrigation. Conclusions Our phantom is comparable to biological tissue in terms of tissue dissolution and could be utilized for in vitro tests due to its injectability and detectability.

The treatment of craniofacial anomalies has been challenging as a result of technological shortcomings that could not provide a consistent protocol to perfectly restore patient-specific anatomy. In the past, wax-up and impression-based maneuvers were implemented to achieve this clinical end. However, with the advent of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology, a rapid and cost-effective workflow in prosthetic rehabilitation has taken the place of the outdated procedures. Because the use of implants is so profound in different facets of restorative dentistry, their placement for craniofacial prosthesis retention has also been widely popular and advantageous in a variety of clinical settings. This review aims to effectively describe the well-rounded and interdisciplinary practice of craniofacial prosthesis fabrication and retention by outlining fabrication, osseointegrated implant placement for prosthesis retention, a myriad of clinical examples in the craniofacial complex, and a glimpse of the future of bioengineering principles to restore bioactivity and physiology to the previously defected tissue.
Bioengineering ; Computer-Aided Design ; Dentistry ; Physiology ; Prostheses and Implants ; Prosthesis Retention ; Rehabilitation