What is it about?
We mix a common medical plastic (PCL) with nanoclay (Laponite) and 3D-print “solid” bone implants using a syringe-based printer. By changing how much clay we add and whether we print the strands along or across the pulling direction, we test how this affects shape accuracy, stiffness, strength and how bone-forming cells behave. The twist: printing filaments at 90° (across the pull) makes the implants stronger, while 0° printing gives surface patterns that cells love to line up on and mineralise.
Featured Image
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Implants for non-load-bearing bone repair need a Goldilocks mix of properties: stiff but not brittle, stable but still friendly to cells. This study shows how a simple “plastic + clay + print direction” recipe can be tuned to trade off mechanical toughness against cell guidance and mineralisation. It turns vague print-by-feel into clear design rules that can help engineers and clinicians co-design implants that both survive handling and actively talk to bone cells.
Perspectives
In this project I basically asked a 3D printer and some bone cells the same question: “Do you prefer the filaments this way or that way?”—and they gave different answers. The printer liked 90° for strength, the cells voted for 0° for better grip and guidance. For me, the fun part is that these “arguments” become a design map: by tweaking clay content and print orientation, we can dial implants towards “mechanically safe”, “cell-happy”, or a smart compromise in between.
Dr Hongyi Chen
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Direct ink writing of bioactive PCL/laponite bone Implants: Engineering the interplay of design, process, structure, and function, Biomedical Technology, September 2025, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmt.2025.100101.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
