In vitro and in vivo evaluation of akermanite bioceramics for bone regeneration

Yan, Xinxin; Jin, Xiaogang; Zhang, Xiaoling; Sun, Hongli; Tu, Jianwei; Tang, Tingting; Chang, Jiang; Dai, Kerong

doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.05.077

Cited by 305 publications

(234 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

228

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…38,39 Compared with β-TCP (Ca 3 PO 4 , representative of bioceramics), AKT not only promoted cell attachment, proliferation, osteogenic differentiation and angiogenesis in vitro but also enhanced in vivo osteogenesis and angiogenesis. 31,32,40 Therefore, AKT was employed as the model material for growing MoS 2 nanosheets to fabricate MS-AKT scaffolds, and the osteogenic potential of these scaffolds was evaluated in the present study. The in vitro experiments demonstrated that both MS-AKT and AKT scaffolds supported the attachment and proliferation of rBMSCs, and even low concentrations of MS-AKT extracts significantly enhanced the proliferation of rBMSCs compared to AKT groups without MoS 2 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Akermanite (AKT, Ca 2 MgSi 2 O 7 ), a Ca-, Mg-and Si-containing bioceramic, was selected as the matrix material for carrying MoS 2 nanosheets because it readily promotes osteogenesis and angiogenesis, as shown in our previous study. 31,32 The structure and composition of the MoS 2 -modified AKT (MS-AKT) scaffolds were characterized by optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). The photothermal performance of the scaffolds was then systematically investigated by altering the scaffold sizes, laser power densities and MoS 2 content.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

Wang

et al. 2017

NPG Asia Mater

Self Cite

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The treatment of malignant bone tumors is a significant clinical challenge because it requires the simultaneous removal of tumor tissues and regeneration of bone defects, and bifunctional three-dimensional (3D) scaffolds that function in both tumor therapy and tissue regeneration are expected to address this need. In this study, novel bifunctional scaffolds (MS-AKT scaffolds) were successfully fabricated by combining a 3D printing technique with a hydrothermal method. During the hydrothermal process, MoS 2 nanosheets were grown in situ on the strut surface of bioceramic scaffolds, endowing them with photothermal therapeutic potential. Under near-infrared (NIR) irradiation, the temperature of the MS-AKT scaffolds rapidly increased and was effectively modulated by varying the MoS 2 content, scaffold sizes and laser power densities. The photothermal temperature significantly decreased the viability of osteosarcoma cells and breast cancer cells and inhibited tumor growth in vivo. Moreover, the MS-AKT scaffolds supported the attachment, proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of bone mesenchymal stem cells and induced bone regeneration in vivo. This bifunctional scaffold, which treats the tumor and facilitates bone growth, offers a promising clinical strategy to treat tumor-induced bone defects. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the feasibility of localized tumor therapy and tissue regeneration in diverse tissue engineering applications using multifunctional biomaterials.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

Wang

et al. 2017

NPG Asia Mater

Self Cite

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Defects in each femoral condyle were made by a Ø2 mm drill toward the medial epicondyle orientated perpendicular to the longitudinal and sagittal axes. 30 Ten implants (2×10 mm) coated with GP/CS coating (with similar number of CS coated samples for comparison) were sterilized and implanted. To avoid wound infection, each animal was given an intramuscular injection of 400,000 U penicillin per day for 3 days after operation.…”

Section: In Vivo Biocompatibility Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of graphene plates’ adoption on the microstructure, mechanical properties, and in vivo biocompatibility of calcium silicate coating

Xie

Ding

et al. 2015

IJN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Calcium silicate (CS) ceramic is a good coating candidate for biomedical implants to improve biocompatibility and accelerate early osseointegration. However, the poor fracture toughness and wear resistance of this ceramic material restricts the long-term performance of implants. In this study, graphene plates (GPs) were used as reinforcement to improve the mechanical properties of CS coating. Composite coating containing 1.5 weight % GPs was prepared by vacuum plasma spraying technology. The good survival of the GPs in the composite coating was demonstrated by Raman analysis, although the defects of the GPs were increased after plasma spraying. Effects of the GPs’ adoption on the microstructure of the coating were studied by scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. Results showed that the GPs were homogenously distributed in the CS grains interface or enwrapped on the particles, and exhibited good wetting behavior with the CS matrix. The wear properties of the composite coating were obviously enhanced by the reinforcement of GPs. The reinforcement mechanism was attributed to the enhanced micro-hardness and interfacial bonding of the particles in the coating. In vivo experiments demonstrated that the composite coating possessed similarly good biocompatibility compared to pure CS coating. The bone-implant contact ratio reached 84.3%±7.4% for GPs/CS coating and 79.6%±9.4% for CS coating after 3 months’ implantation.

show abstract

“…10,11 Various methodologies have been employed to check the bioactivity of materials, and the SBF (Simulated Body Fluid) 12,13 and the in vitro culture of cells, using the biomaterial as a substrate, deserve to be singled out [14][15][16] . Through the cultivation of specific cellular lines 17 in contact with the biomaterial, information can be obtained with respect to the biocompatibility of the sample, verified by means of the proliferation and viability of the cells and by the observation of characteristics such as cellular morfology after a certain period of cultivation, cellular adhesion to the substrate and the latter's degradation. Biomineralization is a highly successful process that consists in the production, in an intra and/or extracellular environment, of mineral compounds that fulfill structural and ionic storage functions 18,19 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nacre Compared to Aragonite as a Bone Substitute: Evaluation of Bioactivity and Biocompatibility

Almeida¹,

Silva²,

Nakamura³

et al. 2015

Mat. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aragonite is a metastable polymorph of calcium carbonate found in mollusk's shells, appearing in tiles and prismatic columns, cemented in a protein matrix -mainly proteins -that acts as a framework on which the aragonite is nucleated forming nacre, besides selecting the morphology of the nucleated cristaline phase. The presence of the mineralyzing organic matrix may affect osteoinductive properties of biogenic aragonite, hypothesis tested by combinated tests, comparing viability and bioactivity of biomineralizated aragonite and nacre. Bioactivity was observed by deposition of Ca-P (presumably calcium phosphate) on the surface of samples immersed in Simulated Body Fluid; biocompatibility was verified by adhesion with VERO cells; cytotoxicity and alkaline phosphatase activity assays were performed with human adipose stem cells (hASC). Samples were characterized by scanning electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction. Both materials showed similar behaviour on bioactivity assay; in contrast, exhibited different behaviours in the presence of hASC.

show abstract

In vitro and in vivo evaluation of akermanite bioceramics for bone regeneration

Cited by 305 publications

References 53 publications

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

Effects of graphene plates’ adoption on the microstructure, mechanical properties, and in vivo biocompatibility of calcium silicate coating

Nacre Compared to Aragonite as a Bone Substitute: Evaluation of Bioactivity and Biocompatibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

In vitro and in vivo evaluation of akermanite bioceramics for bone regeneration

Cited by 305 publications

References 53 publications

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

A 3D-printed scaffold with MoS2 nanosheets for tumor therapy and tissue regeneration

Effects of graphene plates&rsquo; adoption on the microstructure, mechanical properties, and in vivo biocompatibility of calcium silicate coating

Nacre Compared to Aragonite as a Bone Substitute: Evaluation of Bioactivity and Biocompatibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Effects of graphene plates’ adoption on the microstructure, mechanical properties, and in vivo biocompatibility of calcium silicate coating