A graded graphene oxide-hydroxyapatite/silk fibroin biomimetic scaffold for bone tissue engineering

Wang, Qian; Chu, Ying; He, Jianxin; Shao, Weili; Zhou, Yuman; Qi, Kun; Wang, Lidan; Cui, Shizhong

doi:10.1016/j.msec.2017.05.133

Cited by 71 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, hybrid nanomaterials, composed of HAp and graphene derivatives have been examined extensively both as such and with the addition of other (biopolymer) components such as chitosan (Solìs Moré et al, ), silk fibroin (Wang et al, ) or hyaluronic acid (Li et al, , ). In order to synthesize these materials, more than one technique has been used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In situ syntheses of hydroxyapatite‐grafted graphene oxide composites

Iacoboni

Perrozzi

Macera

et al. 2019

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we examined three different syntheses of hydroxyapatite (HAp) and graphene oxide–hydroxyapatite (GO–HAp) composites with a GO content of 9, 33, and 43% wt. The materials were prepared from various precursors of calcium and phosphate ions, using an in situ synthesis method, with mild conditions to avoid reducing the GO. In situ bonding technology proposed that calcium ions bond with GO at first and then HAp nanoflakes in situ grow on GO sheets, forming GO–HAp nanocomposite. The aim of the present work was to analyze the differences due to the use of different starting reagents and verify, with the addition of increasing amounts of GO, the changes in morphology, crystallinity, and solubility of the obtained HAp composites. Detailed structural and morphological characterization studies of the composites were carried out using scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive X‐ray spectrometry, X‐ray powder diffraction, Raman spectroscopy, and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. We found that GO sheets act as a nucleation site for HAp mineralization, but we observed a loss of the crystallographic order due to the intercalation of the graphenic sheets between the HAp particles.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In situ syntheses of hydroxyapatite‐grafted graphene oxide composites

Iacoboni

Perrozzi

Macera

et al. 2019

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wang et al. fabricated a graded biomimetic scaffold . They dispersed GO and hydroxyapatite with chitosan solution, blended the mixture with SF solution, and then freeze‐dried the mixture obtained.…”

Section: Combined Application Of Graphene‐family Materials and Sfmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… (a) Electron diffraction pattern of cGO‐HA (1:4) composite nanoparticles, (b) SEM and physical map of the dense, cancellous, and sponge layers in cGO‐HA/SF scaffolds. Reproduced from ref . with permission from Elsevier.…”

Section: Combined Application Of Graphene‐family Materials and Sfmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Application of Graphene‐Family Materials and Silk Fibroin in Biomedicine

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main graphene‐family materials used in biomedicine include graphene, graphene oxide, and reduced graphene oxide. They have been well documented for their distinctive microstructure and excellent physicochemical properties. Although they also have some shortcomings, such as slow biodegradation and dose‐dependent biotoxicity, these problems can be solved by using them in conjunction with other biomaterials. Silk fibroin (SF), a natural polymer material with many advantageous properties, has been used widely in biomedicine. However, SF requires modification by other biomaterials to improve its mechanical properties and control its degradation rate for further use. In recent years, the combined application of graphene‐family materials and SF has increased gradually, and the effects of it on cell behavior have been preliminary investigated, such as promoting cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. Further studies of the combined use have been conducted in biomedicine, including tissue engineering, biosensor, and other biomedical usage. In this paper, this combined application has been outlined and summarized, and some envisioned challenges and future perspectives have been mentioned. We hope that this review will provide some reference and inspiration for the combined application of graphene‐family materials and SF in biomedicine in the future.

show abstract

“…The metal or metalloid category consists of silicon (Si), 65 zinc oxide (ZnO), 89 28 and nitinol (NiTi). 57 Polymers include poly(L-lactide) (PLLA), 46 poly(dopamine) (PDA), 68 poly(ɛ-caprolactone) (PCL), 14,36,203 poly(ethylenimine) (PEI), 37, 82 poly(lacticcoglycolic acid) (PLGA)-tussah, 61 silk fibroin (SF), 43 polyethylene terephthalate-based artificial ligament group (PET-ALs), 78 47,65,89 and inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) 49,71 were employed to measure the release rate of ions, and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS) 64 was utilized to assess the Ca/P ratio. Additional assays and measures used for sample characterization include thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA), 37,71,82,84,87 energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), 33 75 swelling study, 75 weight loss measurement, 60 diametral tensile strength (DTS), 60 nanoindentation measurements, 67, 76 photoluminescence (PL) spectra, 94 elemental analysis experiment, 25 magnetometry, 25 selected-area electron diffraction (SAED), 57, 91 wettability evaluation, 89 roughness evaluation 14,28,89 and PL spectrum.…”

Section: Chemical Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CharacterizationSynthesized graphene, graphene derivatives and their compositions were chemically characterized using Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR)14, 21, 30, 36, 37, 42, 43, 45, 48, 61, 63, 65, 66, 68, 73 74, 75, 84-86, 91, 92 and raman spectroscopy.13, 17-19, 21, 22, 24-28 32-34, 36, 37, 40-42, 45, 47, 48, 54, 55, 57, 59, 61-65, 68, 69, 71, 72, 75-78, 86-89, 93 Also, morphology and topography of the samples were characterized by SEM,4, 13, 20-23, 25, 26, 29, 33-36, 38, 43, 45-56, 58, 60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 70, 71 73-85, 87, 91, 92 field emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM),17,40,42,44,72,79,86,90,91 transmission electron microscopy (TEM),4,18,30,31,43,44,50,53,61,64,66,71,77,80,82,86,87,[89][90][91][92][93][94] and atomic force microscope (AFM).14, 17-19, 21, 24-26, 36-40, 42, 45, 47, 49, 53, 54, 59, 62 69, 70, 77, 79, 80, 82, 89 Surface hydrophobicity of the composites and their chemical environments were evaluated by contact angle (CA) measurements14, 20, 28, 36-38, 41, 42, 46, , 70, 78, 81, 86, 88, 91, 92 were employed in the various studies to evaluate mechanical strength. Inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro effect of graphene structures as an osteoinductive factor in bone tissue engineering: A systematic review

Mohammadrezaei

Golzar

Rad

et al. 2018

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graphene and its derivatives have been well-known as influential factors in differentiating stem/progenitor cells toward the osteoblastic lineage. However, there have been many controversies in the literature regarding the parameters effect on bone regeneration, including graphene concentration, size, type, dimension, hydrophilicity, functionalization, and composition. This study attempts to produce a comprehensive review regarding the given parameters and their effects on stimulating cell behaviors such as proliferation, viability, attachment and osteogenic differentiation. In this study, a systematic search of MEDLINE database was conducted for in vitro studies on the use of graphene and its derivatives for bone tissue engineering from January 2000 to February 2018, organized according to the PRISMA statement. According to reviewed articles, different graphene derivative, including graphene, graphene oxide (GO) and reduced graphene oxide (RGO) with mass ratio ≤1.5 wt % for all and concentration up to 50 μg/mL for graphene and GO, and 60 μg/mL for RGO, are considered to be safe for most cell types. However, these concentrations highly depend on the types of cells. It was discovered that graphene with lateral size less than 5 µm, along with GO and RGO with lateral dimension less than 1 µm decrease cell viability. In addition, the three-dimensional structure of graphene can promote cell-cell interaction, migration and proliferation. When graphene and its derivatives are incorporated with metals, polymers, and minerals, they frequently show promoted mechanical properties and bioactivity. Last, graphene and its derivatives have been found to increase the surface roughness and porosity, which can highly enhance cell adhesion and differentiation. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 106A: 2284-2343, 2018.

show abstract

A graded graphene oxide-hydroxyapatite/silk fibroin biomimetic scaffold for bone tissue engineering

Cited by 71 publications

References 38 publications

In situ syntheses of hydroxyapatite‐grafted graphene oxide composites

In situ syntheses of hydroxyapatite‐grafted graphene oxide composites

Combined Application of Graphene‐Family Materials and Silk Fibroin in Biomedicine

In vitro effect of graphene structures as an osteoinductive factor in bone tissue engineering: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About