## 3 Results
### Outcomes Analysis
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Outcome Parameters**} \\ \hline
**Studies** & **Groups** & **Imaging** & **Histology** & **Biomechanical Testing** & **Main Findings** \\ \hline  & Group 1: HA/TCP & & & & The inflammatory \\  & with 70:30 ratio; & & & & cells were still \\  & Group 2: HA/TCP & & & & present in areas \\  & with 50:50 ratio; & & & & where active bone \\ [PERSON] et al. 2016 & Group 3: & & & and blood vessel \\
[34] & HA/TCP/chitosan. & & & formation was \\  & This study did not & & & occurring. The \\  & report the number of & & & remnants of scaffold \\  & animals used in each & & & biomaterials were \\  & group (n = 6 in total). & & & rarely seen. \\ \hline  & & & & The original 3D \\  & & & & architecture of the \\  & & & & PLGA/TCP-BMP \\ Group 1: TCP (n = 3); & & & scaffold was found to \\  & Group 2: PLGA/TCP & & & be completely lost, \\  & (n = 3); Group 3: & & & & properly maintained \\  & rhBMP-2-coated TCP & & & in TCP-BMP \\  & (n = 3); Group 4: & (1) PET/CT & (1) H\&E & scaffolds. Regular \\ [PERSON] et al. 2021 [26] & rhBMP-2-coated & & (2) Micro-CT & (1) H\&E & compressive strength \\  & PLGA/TCP (n = 3); & & & testing & observed with \\  & Group 5: & & & TCP-BMP scaffolds. \\  & prefabricated & & & & The \\  & rhBMP-2-coated TCP & & & & TCP-BMP scaffold \\  & (n = 3). & & & was successfully \\  & & & & fabricated, exhibiting \\  & & & & pronounced effects \\  & & & & on bone regeneration \\  & & & & and vascularization. \\ \hline  & & & & Complete bone \\  & & & & formation was \\  & & & & observed in the \\  & & & & defect area, and \\  & & & & simultaneous; the \\  & & & & foreign material was \\  & & & & resolved almost \\  & & & & completely. After \\  & & & & implantation of the \\  & & & & classical types of \\  & & & & ceramics, only \\  & & & & incomplete bone \\  & & & formation and a \\  & & & & lower resorption rate \\  & & & & of the foreign bodies \\  & & & & were noted. \\ \hline  & & & & Both DPNCCs and \\  & & & & BMA loaded into the \\  & & & & 3D-printed \\  & & & & osteeconductive \\  & & & & scaffold support the \\  & & & strength testing & regeneration of \\  & & & (2) Mechanical & \\  & & & strength testing & density, compression \\  & & & strength, and \\  & & & & trabecular structures \\  & & & similar to those of \\  & & & native bone. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Outcome parameters and main findings. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Studies**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Groups**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Outcome Parameters**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Main Findings**} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-6}  & & **Imaging** & **Histology** & **Biomechanical Testing** & \\ \hline \hline \multirow{8}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2022 [36]} & Group 1: BTCP (n = 4); Group 2: \(\beta\)TCP/rh8 MP2 (n = 4); Group 3: \(\beta\)TCP/MSCs (n = 4); Group 4: PCL/BTCP (1) CT scan & (1) H\&E & NS & \(\beta\)-TCP scaffold groups resulted in significantly greater rates of new bone formation. Scaffid composition, pedicle preservation, and treatment with MSCs or rhBMP2 influence new bone formation and scaffold and degradation rates in the prefabrication technique. \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-3} \cline{5-6}  & Group 1: \(\beta\)CP (n = 6); Group 2: clinical control (n = 6); Group 3: cadaveric study (n = 3). & (1) CT scan & (1) H\&E & NS & \(\beta\)-TCP scaffolds groups resulted in significantly greater rates of new bone formation. Scaffid composition, pedicle preservation, and treatment with MSCs or rhBMP2 influence new bone formation and scaffold and degradation rates in the prefabrication technique. \\ \hline \hline \multirow{8}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2022 [36]} & & & & & \(\beta\)-TCP scaffolds groups resulted in significantly greater rates of new bone formation. Scaffid composition, pedicle preservation, and treatment with MSCs or rhBMP2 influence new bone formation and scaffold and degradation rates in the prefabrication technique.