4.5 Review

A tissue engineering approach based on the use of bioceramics for bone repair

Journal

BIOMATERIALS SCIENCE
Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages 40-51

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2bm00071g

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Comision Inter-ministerial de Ciencia y Tecnolog a (CICYT, Spain) [MAT2008736, CSO2010-11384-E]
  2. Comunidad Autonoma de Madrid (CAM) [S2009/MAT-1472]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [RETICEF RD06/0013/1002]
  4. Fundacion de Investigacion Medica Mutua Madrilena

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biomimetics takes advantage of natural strategies for the solution of technological problems, including the proper design of biomaterials. Living bone exhibits a hierarchical porosity with both giant and nanometric pores which must be reproduced for the design of biomaterials for hard tissue repair. Bioactive and degradable bioceramics are a good alternative for the manufacture of scaffolds. Tissue engineering approaches to improve bone regeneration include strategies supporting endogenous osteoblast adhesion, proliferation (osteoconduction), osteoinduction by growth factors, and osteoprogenitors. Understanding the natural ossification mechanisms and the role of biomolecules involved in this process is a requirement for the design of bone tissue scaffolds. Mesoporous bioactive ceramics, namely mesoporous silica and templated glasses with nanometric pores to host growth factors, conformed into 3D scaffolds with micrometric porosity by rapid prototyping, are a good option for bone regeneration. In this regard, biomolecules such as well characterized bone morphogenetic proteins and others under current research, such as osteostatin and osteoprogenitors, are promising strategies in bone tissue engineering applications. Future developments in biomaterials will come in both micro- and nano-scales, and molecular and cell biology approaches will provide suitable solutions to the demanding needs of these compounds.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available