Bending Properties, compression Properties, biocompatibility and bioactivity of sulfonated carbon Fibers/PEEK composites with graphene oxide coating

Li, Yadan; Jia, Hui; Cui, Xiaohua; Qin, Wen; Qin, Shengnan; Yang, Wu; Bai, Mingyu; Liu, Xiaqing; Feng, Fan; Ma, Jing; Liu, Ying

doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.151774

Cited by 22 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…109,110 All animal models successfully compared osteogenesis capability, but the size of the defect was not adequately described to make a pattern for later comparison. However, the sites of the defect could be listed as a cranial defect in 49 experiments, 31,35,39–44,47–50,52,54–56,59–63,65,67,69,71–75,77–81,83,84,86–91,93,94,96,98,100,109,110 limb defect in 25 experiments, 36–38,45,46,51,53,58,64,66,68,70,76,82,85,92,95,97,99,101–103,105–107 or jaw defect in four experiments. 39,57,104,108 These findings may reflect the exposition to functional charges or not during bone repair.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…77 experiments were assessed in the manuscripts reviewed. Calcium was associated with graphene in 30 experiments, 37,38,40,41,46,47,58–63,66,77,78,81–83,85,88,89,94–98,102,106,107,110 with 35 experiments presenting the association of graphene with Natural Polymers, 35,39,42–45,47,50–52,56,58,59,62–64,66–71,74,77,81,83,84,86–90,93,100,102,109 and 30 experiments presenting the association of Synthetic Polymers 31,37,48,49,53,54,57,61,65,68,72,73,75,76,79,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most used graphene type in this review of literature was Graphene oxide, representing 52 out of 77 manuscripts. 31,35,37,39,42–45,47–51,53,55,56,58–64,66,67,69,70,72–75,77,78,81–86,88–91,93,97,98,100,101,103,105,108,109 Graphene only was used in 13 out of 77 manuscripts. 38,46,52,54,57,79,80,82,92,95,99,104,110 Reduced Graphene (from GO) was used in 12 out of 77 manuscripts 40,41,65,68,71,76,87,94,96,102,106,107 and in one out of 77 manuscripts researchers used another graphene type.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The evaluations in most of manuscripts were conducted with micro CT and histological analysis methods, such as histomorphometry 15,31,35,38,40–44,47–53,55–60,62–83,85–88,90–96,98–102,104–107,111 Immunohistochemistry had an important place in the methods of evaluation for many articles 35,50,59,64,67,86,88,91 in addition to X-ray 45,46, 48,51,72,85,97,101,107 and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). 42,44,53,66,75,82,89,90,103,104 All methods of characterization were used to compare and establish significant results for in vivo bone produced by the graphene biomaterials.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of graphene-based biomaterials for in vivo bone tissue engineering

Achôa

Mattos²,

Clements

et al. 2023

J Biomater Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing demand for more efficient materials for medical applications brought together two previously distinct fields: medicine and engineering. Regenerative medicine has evolved with the engineering contributions to improve materials and devices for medical use. In this regard, graphene is one of the most promising materials for bone tissue engineering and its potential for bone repair has been studied by several research groups. The aim of this study is to conduct a scoping review including articles published in the last 12 years (from 2010 to 2022) that have used graphene and its derivatives (graphene oxide and reduced graphene) in preclinical studies for bone tissue regeneration, searching in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and clinicaltrials.gov (to confirm no study has started with clinical trial). Boolean searches were performed using the defined key words “bone” and “graphene”, and manuscript abstracts were uploaded to Rayyan, a web-tool for systematic and scoping reviews. This scoping review was conducted based on Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Scoping Reviews and the report follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA- ScR) statement. After the search protocol and application of the inclusion criteria, 77 studies were selected and evaluated by five blinded researchers. Most of the selected studies used composite materials associated with graphene and its derivatives to natural and synthetic polymers, bioglass, and others. Although a variety of graphene materials were analyzed in these studies, they all concluded that graphene, its derivatives, and its composites improve bone repair processes by increasing osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, new bone formation, and angiogenesis. Thus, this systematic review opens up new opportunities for the development of novel strategies for bone tissue engineering with graphene.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of graphene-based biomaterials for in vivo bone tissue engineering

Achôa

Mattos²,

Clements

et al. 2023

J Biomater Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although PEEK is a stable materials when exposed to most of the chemical reagents, its smooth surface can be disintegrated when subjected to ionization and penetration from strong acid and strong alkali solutions. Compared to the time-consuming process of modifying the surface of PEEK using a high concentration sodium hydroxide (NaOH), the treatment of PEEK when immersed in concentrated sulfuric acid (H 2 SO 4 ) is more prevalent for the surface functionalization of PEEK [75,88,89]. By immersing PEEK in concentrated H 2 SO 4 , the surface can be sulfonated by forming a three-dimensional porous nanostructure [90].…”

Section: Chemical Etchingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modification of polyether ether ketone for the repairing of bone defects

Chen

Cao

et al. 2022

Biomed. Mater.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone damage as a consequence of disease or trauma is a common global occurrence. For bone damage treatment - bone implant materials are necessary across three classifications of surgical intervention (i.e. fixation, repair, and replacement). Many types of bone implant materials have been developed to meet the requirements of bone repair. Among them, polyether ether ketone (PEEK) has been considered as one of the next generation of bone implant materials, owing to its advantages related to good biocompatibility, chemical stability, X-ray permeability, elastic modulus comparable to natural bone, as well as the ease of processing and modification. However, as PEEK is a naturally bioinert material, some modification is needed to improve its integration with adjacent bones after implantation. Therefore, it has become a very hot topic of biomaterials research and various strategies for the modification of PEEK including blending, 3D printing, coating, chemical modification and the introduction of bioactive and/or antibacterial substances have been proposed. In this systematic review, the recent advances in modification of PEEK and its application prospect as bone implants are summarized, and the remaining challenges are also discussed.

show abstract

Calcium Silicate Whiskers‐Enforced Poly(Ether‐Ether‐Ketone) Composites with Improved Mechanical Properties and Biological Activities for Bearing Bone Reconstruction

Wang

Lei

et al. 2022

Macromolecular Bioscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poly (ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) displays promising potential application in bone tissue repair and orthopedic surgery due to its good biocompatibility and chemical stability. However, the bio-inertness and poor mechanical strength of PEEK greatly limit its application in load-bearing bones. In this study, calcium silicate whiskers (CSws) are synthesized and then compounded with PEEK to fabricate the PEEK/CSw composites with excellent mechanical properties, biological activity. Compared with PEEK, the PEEK/CSw composites exhibited higher hydrophilicity and ability to deposit hydroxyapatite on the surface. CSws are evenly dispersed in the PEEK matrix at 10 wt% content and the mechanical strength of the PEEK/CSw composite is ≈96.9 ± 2.4 MPa, 136.3 ± 2.4 MPa, and 266.0 ± 3.2 MPa, corresponding to tensile strength, compressive strength, and bending strength, respectively, which is 20%, 18%, and 52% higher than that of pure PEEK. The composites improve the adhesion, proliferation, and osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs. Furthermore, PEEK/CSw composite remarkably improves bone formation and osteointegration, which has higher bone repair capacity than PEEK. These results demonstrate that the PEEK/CSw scaffolds display superior abilities to integrate with the host bone and promising potential in the field of load bearing bone repair.

show abstract

Bending Properties, compression Properties, biocompatibility and bioactivity of sulfonated carbon Fibers/PEEK composites with graphene oxide coating

Cited by 22 publications

References 61 publications

A scoping review of graphene-based biomaterials for in vivo bone tissue engineering

A scoping review of graphene-based biomaterials for in vivo bone tissue engineering

Modification of polyether ether ketone for the repairing of bone defects

Calcium Silicate Whiskers‐Enforced Poly(Ether‐Ether‐Ketone) Composites with Improved Mechanical Properties and Biological Activities for Bearing Bone Reconstruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About