2014
DOI: 10.1039/c3tb21697g
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nanocrystalline silicon substituted hydroxyapatite effects on osteoclast differentiation and resorptive activity

Abstract: In the present study, the effects of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (nano-HA) and nanocrystalline Si-substituted hydroxyapatite (nano-SiHA) on osteoclast differentiation and resorptive activity have been evaluated in vitro using osteoclast-like cells. The action of these materials on proinflammatory and reparative macrophage populations was also studied. NanoSiHA disks delayed the osteoclast differentiation and decreased the resorptive activity of these cells on their surface, as compared to nano-HA samples, w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
24
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
2
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…20 This effect has been also observed with cultured L929 fibroblasts, Saos-2 osteoblasts and MC3T3-E1 preosteoblasts. 14,21 On the other hand, nano-SiHA disks delayed the osteoclast differentiation and decreased the resorptive activity of these cells on their surface, as compared to nano-HA samples, without affecting cell viability, 22 thus indicating a beneficial action of Si-substituted material for bone regeneration in agreement with other studies. 13,15,17,23,24 Since the balance between proinflammatory (M1) and reparative (M2) macrophages has been involved in their negative or positive role in disease and tissue remodelling, 4,5,8,9 the effects of nano-HA and nano-SiHA on murine macrophage populations have been evaluated in the present study in basal conditions and in the presence of either pro-inflammatory (LPS) or anti-inflammatory (IL-10) stimuli.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…20 This effect has been also observed with cultured L929 fibroblasts, Saos-2 osteoblasts and MC3T3-E1 preosteoblasts. 14,21 On the other hand, nano-SiHA disks delayed the osteoclast differentiation and decreased the resorptive activity of these cells on their surface, as compared to nano-HA samples, without affecting cell viability, 22 thus indicating a beneficial action of Si-substituted material for bone regeneration in agreement with other studies. 13,15,17,23,24 Since the balance between proinflammatory (M1) and reparative (M2) macrophages has been involved in their negative or positive role in disease and tissue remodelling, 4,5,8,9 the effects of nano-HA and nano-SiHA on murine macrophage populations have been evaluated in the present study in basal conditions and in the presence of either pro-inflammatory (LPS) or anti-inflammatory (IL-10) stimuli.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Because of their predominant role in the deposition of bone tissue, osteoblasts are commonly used for the in vitro evaluation of biomaterials. However, osteoclasts resorption is also essential for a complete bone regeneration and only few studies address the behavior of osteoclasts in contact with BAG …”
Section: Glassesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RAW‐264.7 cells were seeded on hydroxyapatite disks, prepared as previously described (Matesanz et al, ), placed into each well of a 24‐well culture plate, at a density of 1 × 10 4 cells/cm 2 in α‐MEM without phenol red and supplemented with 4% FBS. In order to stimulate osteoclast differentiation, 40 ng/ml of mouse RANKL and 25 ng/ml M‐CSF were added to the culture medium and cells were cultured for 14 days in the presence of MLO‐Y4 cell‐CM (20% in standard medium), renewing culture medium every 3 days, as previously reported (Torres‐Rodríguez et al, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%