In vivo evaluation of sol-gel Bioglass®. Biomechanical findings

Wheeler, Donna L.; Hoellrich, R. G.; McLoughlin, S. W.; Chamberland, David L.; Stokes, Kathy

doi:10.1016/b978-008042692-1/50083-2

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The in vivo behavior of 58S and 77S bioactive gelglasses demonstrates even more rapid regeneration of trabecular bone in the same rabbit model. 35,36 A study by Wheeler et al showed that the accelerated bone formation was accompanied by resorption of the gelglass particles in 3 months. 35 The rate of solubility and release of soluble silicon reported in vitro 32 correlates with the rate of resorption of the gel-glass particles in vivo.…”

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…35,36 A study by Wheeler et al showed that the accelerated bone formation was accompanied by resorption of the gelglass particles in 3 months. 35 The rate of solubility and release of soluble silicon reported in vitro 32 correlates with the rate of resorption of the gel-glass particles in vivo. 35 Active mineralization occurred throughout the grafted bone defects, with osteoblasts lining the new bone formed around the gel-glass particulates.…”

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…35 The rate of solubility and release of soluble silicon reported in vitro 32 correlates with the rate of resorption of the gel-glass particles in vivo. 35 Active mineralization occurred throughout the grafted bone defects, with osteoblasts lining the new bone formed around the gel-glass particulates. 35 All grafted defects had significantly more bone within the area than the unfilled controls.…”

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A comparison of the bioactive gel-glasses with BG particles by Wheeler et al 35 was especially interesting. The average size of the BG particles was initially smaller than the 58S and 77S particles.…”

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Bioactive materials: The potential for tissue regeneration

Hench

1998

J. Biomed. Mater. Res.

343

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regeneration Of Trabecular Bone With Bioactive Gel-glassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bioactive materials: The potential for tissue regeneration

Hench

1998

J. Biomed. Mater. Res.

343

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The bioactive properties of certain glasses have been demonstrated both in vitro and in vivo. [1][2][3] Compared to typical melt-derived bioactive glasses, sol-gel bioactive glasses (SBG) have larger surface area and OH groups are present on their surface. 4 Overall, gel-derived bioactive glasses dis-play higher bioactivity than melted glasses, and this is represented by faster formation of a strong bond with the bone tissue as well by the stimulation of living bone to faster regeneration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New sol‐gel bioactive glass and titania composites with enhanced physico‐chemical and biological properties

Pawlik

Widziolek

Cholewa‐Kowalska

et al. 2013

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed TiO2 matrix composites modified by sol-gel bioactive glasses (SBG) of either high CaO content (A2) or high SiO2 content (S2). The latter were mixed with titanium dioxide (TiO2) at 75:25, 50:50, and 25:75 weight ratios and sintered at 1250°C for 2 h. We examined the effects of various types (A2 or S2) and compositional TiO2 :SBG ratios on the mechanical properties of resulting composites, their bioactivity and human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) response. The chemistry of SBGs influenced the phase composition, mechanical and biological properties of the composites. Rutile and titanite prevailed in A2-TiO2 composites, and rutile and crystobalite in S2-TiO2 composites. Compressive strength increased significantly for 25A2-TiO2 composites (140 MPa) compared to matrix TiO2 (58 MPa). Composites containing 50-75 wt % of either SBG displayed bioactive properties as determined by simulated body fluid test. Compared to TiO2, human bone marrow stromal cell (BMSC) viability was enhanced on the composites containing 25 wt % of either SBG, whereas the composites modified by 25 wt % of S2 enhanced alkaline phosphatase activity and mineralization in cultures treated with osteogenic inducers-dexamethasone (Dex) or bone morphogenetic protein. Increasing amounts of A2 in TiO2 matrix decreased cell viability but increased collagen deposition and mineralized matrix production by BMSC. Considering the physico-chemical and biological properties of the presented composites, the modification of TiO2 with SBG may prove useful strategy in several bone tissue related regeneration strategies.

show abstract

Biomaterials: Bioceramics

Jones

Hench

2006

Encyclopedia of Medical Devices and Instrumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioceramics are ceramics that can be used for the reconstruction or regeneration of diseased or damaged tissues, they can be bioinert (e.g., alumina and zirconia), resorbable in the body (e.g., tricalcium phosphate), or bioactive (e.g., bioactive glass, hydroxyapatite), which bond to certain tissues and are used in regenerative medicine. In orthopedics, diseased joints are traditionally replaced by prostheses made of bioinert materials that may last up to 15 years. Advanced metal alloys, special polymers, and bioinert ceramics are the basis of this success. However, as life expectancy of our population increases, patients require >30 years from their devices. For large bone defects and severely diseased or damaged soft tissue such as the lung and the liver, transplantation is used, but donors are never enough. To satisfy this growing need for very long term tissue repair a shift of emphasis on replacement of tissues to regeneration of tissues is needed. An understanding and use of biological approaches is essential. This article describes current applications of bioceramics as medical devices and discusses development of porous bioceramic and composite scaffolds for tissue engineering. It suggests that bioactive ceramics will be used for future biomedical devices for regenerative medicine due to their potential for guiding tissue regeneration by stimulating cells at the genetic level.

show abstract

In vivo evaluation of sol-gel Bioglass®. Biomechanical findings

Cited by 7 publications

References 3 publications

Bioactive materials: The potential for tissue regeneration

Bioactive materials: The potential for tissue regeneration

New sol‐gel bioactive glass and titania composites with enhanced physico‐chemical and biological properties

Biomaterials: Bioceramics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About