Hydrogels have been widely applied to the fabrication of tissue engineering scaffolds via three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting because of their extracellular matrix-like properties, capacity for living cell encapsulation, and shapeable customization depending on the defect shape. However, the current hydrogel scaffolds show limited regeneration activity, especially in the application of periodontal tissue regeneration. In this study, we attempted to develop a novel multi-component hydrogel that possesses good biological activity, can wrap living cells for 3D bioprinting and can regenerate periodontal soft and hard tissue. The multi-component hydrogel consisted of gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA), sodium alginate (SA) and bioactive glass microsphere (BGM), which was first processed into hydrogel scaffolds by cell-free 3D printing to evaluate its printability and in vitro biological performances. The cell-free 3D-printed scaffolds showed uniform porous structures and good swelling capability. The BGM-loaded scaffold exhibited good biocompatibility, enhanced osteogenic differentiation, apatite formation abilities and desired mechanical strength. The composite hydrogel was further applied as a bio-ink to load with mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (mBMSCs) and growth factors (BMP2 and PDGF) for the fabrication of a scaffold for periodontal tissue regeneration. The cell wrapped in the hydrogel still maintained good cellular vitality after 3D bioprinting and showed enhanced osteogenic differentiation and soft tissue repair capabilities in BMP2- and PDGF-loaded scaffolds. It was noted that after transplantation of the cell- and growth factor-laden scaffolds in Beagle dog periodontal defects, significant regeneration of gingival tissue, periodontal ligament, and alveolar bone was detected. Importantly, a reconstructed periodontal structure was established in the treatment group eight weeks post-transplantation of the scaffolds containing the cell and growth factors. In conclusion, we developed a bioactive composite bio-ink for the fabrication of scaffolds applicable for the reconstruction and regeneration of periodontal tissue defects.

Background: This study aims to compare the percentage of dentin removed, instrumentation efficacy, root canal filling and load at fracture between contracted endodontic cavities, and traditional endodontic cavities on root canal therapy in premolars. Methods: Forty extracted intact human first premolars were imaged with micro-CT and randomly assigned to the contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) or traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) groups. CEC was prepared with the aid of a 3D-printed template, canals were prepared with a 0.04 taper M-Two rotary instrument, and cavities were restored with resin. Specimens were loaded to fracture in an Instron Universal Testing Machine after a fatigue phase. The data were analyzed by the independent samples T test and Mann-Whitney U test, appropriate post hoc tests. Results: In the premolars tested in vitro, the percentage of dentin removed in the premolars with two dental roots in the CEC group (3.85% ± 0.42%) was significantly smaller (P < 0.05) than in the TEC group (4.94% ± 0.5%). The untouched canal wall (UCW) after instrumentation for TECs (16.43% ± 6.56%) was significantly lower (P < .05) than the UCW (24.42% ± 9.19%) for CECs in single-rooted premolars. No significant differences were observed in the increased canal volume and surface areas in premolars between the TEC and CEC groups (P > 0.05). CECs conserved coronal dentin in premolars with two dental roots but no impact on the instrument efficacy. There were no differences between the CEC groups and the TEC groups in the percentage of filling material and voids (P > 0.05). In addition, the mean load at failure of premolars did not significantly differ between the CEC and TEC groups and there was no significant difference in the type of fracture (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that CEC could not improve the fracture resistance of the endodontically treated premolars. The instrumentation efficacy and the percentage of filling material did not significantly differ between CECs and TECs in premolars.

Bone defect treatment remains a significant clinical challenge, further exacerbated by the demographic transition toward an aging society. In elderly populations, the increased proportion of senescent cells emerges as a fundamental determinant that substantially compromises regenerative outcomes. In senescent bone tissues, the progressive accumulation of senescent cells compromises bone regenerative capacity through multifaceted mechanisms, encompassing both intrinsic functional impairment of senescent cells and the far-reaching impact of the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) on the surrounding cellular and tissue microenvironment. Advanced biomaterials provide a platform for targeted anti-senescence interventions. One strategy is the selective elimination of senescent cells, achieved by engineering materials as delivery systems for senolytics or as platforms that modulate immune clearance. A more nuanced approach seeks functional rejuvenation, using biomaterials to restore cellular homeostasis by mitigating inflammation, correcting metabolic dysfunction, and reprogramming gene expression. A holistic strategy remodels the senescent microenvironment itself, accomplished through materials designed to restore biochemical homeostasis, provide physical guidance, and reprogram biological communication. This review delineates these material-based strategies, from direct cellular targeting to comprehensive niche remodeling. We also evaluate the significant hurdles to clinical translation, including challenges in biological specificity, preclinical model fidelity, and regulatory pathways. Ultimately, this work provides a conceptual framework for designing next-generation biomaterials to regenerate aging bone tissues.