2012
DOI: 10.1080/01694243.2012.697776
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cell interactions with superhydrophilic and superhydrophobic surfaces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
88
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 132 publications
(95 citation statements)
references
References 159 publications
6
88
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(Roach, et al, 2006;Lord, et al, 2010;Raffaini and Ganazzoli, 2013;Song and Mano, 2013;Oliveira, et al, 2014b) Controlling these features can synergistically improve cell behavior.…”
Section: Topographical Cues -Micro Sub-micro Nanomentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(Roach, et al, 2006;Lord, et al, 2010;Raffaini and Ganazzoli, 2013;Song and Mano, 2013;Oliveira, et al, 2014b) Controlling these features can synergistically improve cell behavior.…”
Section: Topographical Cues -Micro Sub-micro Nanomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Oliveira, et al, 2014b) A classical example is the case of roughness-wettability. (Neto, et al, 2011;Oliveira, et al, 2011b;Oliveira, et al, 2014b) Introducing nano/micro-roughness in a substracte in the first instance may represent a higher surface area available for cell growth. Nevertheless, the altered roughness might also change the surface wettability into values that are not as favorable for cell adhesion/growth.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nanostructured functionalities on surfaces have also potential in the diagnosis of cancer diseases in early stage [19,20] and blocking cancer cells growth [15]. In general, the cell adhesion is influenced by a lot of factors but the surface properties, such as wettability, roughness, surface charge, chemical functionalities, stiffness and interactions of scaffold degradation products [21] play the dominant role. In the biological applications, the wettability of nanostructured surface is considered to be the most important attribute of the nanostructured surfaces influencing cell adhesion [7] and biological response on artificial materials [21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, the cell adhesion is influenced by a lot of factors but the surface properties, such as wettability, roughness, surface charge, chemical functionalities, stiffness and interactions of scaffold degradation products [21] play the dominant role. In the biological applications, the wettability of nanostructured surface is considered to be the most important attribute of the nanostructured surfaces influencing cell adhesion [7] and biological response on artificial materials [21]. It has been shown that cells achieve maximum attachment onto surfaces with moderate wettability [3,7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, the mere presence of an implant can critically influence the tissue healing process; for instance, the biocompatibility of a biomaterial depends on its surface properties, such as chemistry and chemical functionalities, topography and roughness, wettability, surface charge, elasticity/stiffness, etc. 2,3 Consequently, implants with different surface properties are expected to affect differently the tissue integration. Titanium and its alloys, the most used materials for hard tissue replacement, are classified as bioinert, due to the passivation layer of amorphous titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ), which is naturally formed on the surface.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%