4.7 Article

In vitro and in vivo degradation of an injectable bone repair composite

Journal

POLYMER DEGRADATION AND STABILITY
Volume 95, Issue 9, Pages 1736-1742

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2010.05.015

Keywords

In vitro; In vivo; Degradation; Injectable; Bone repair

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50772052]
  2. Doctor Subject Foundation of the Ministry of Education of China [20070003004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In vitro and in vivo degradation behaviors of an injectable bone regeneration composite (IBRC) which comprised of nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen (nHAC) particles in alginate hydrogel carrier were investigated. In vitro degradation quantitative testing indicated that the alginate had a faster degradation rate in simulated body fluid (SBF) than in deionized water at 37 degrees C. Similarly, IBRC also had a higher degradation rate in SBF than in deionized water at 37 degrees C, which was evaluated by alginate molecular weight measurement, mechanical properties test and degradation kinetics evaluation. But molecular weight of alginate degraded slower in IBRC than that in aqueous solution. In vitro results showed that degradation medium SBF had influence on degradation of alginate molecules. In the in vivo degradation study, surprisingly, there was no obvious decreasing of molecular weight of alginate from 0 to 8 weeks. IBRC degraded mostly after 24 weeks implantation and was replaced by connective tissue. No fibrous capsule and acute inflammatory reaction were found during the observed 24 weeks after IBRC implantation. There is only a mild short-term inflammatory response in rat dorsum muscle. These results indicated that IBRC had a controllable degradability and biocompatibility. Therefore. IBRC may be a promising degradable material for bone repair and bone tissue engineering. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available