4.7 Article

Multiwall carbon nanotubes/polycaprolactone composites for bone tissue engineering application

Journal

COLLOIDS AND SURFACES B-BIOINTERFACES
Volume 93, Issue -, Pages 226-234

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2012.01.011

Keywords

Bone tissue engineering; Scaffold; Polycaprolactone (PCL); Multiwall carbon nanotube (MWNT); Bone marrow stroma cell (BMSC)

Funding

  1. Chinese Natural Science Foundation [81000659]
  2. Science & Technology Support Program of Sichuan Province [2011FZ0010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWNTs)/polycaprolactone composite scaffolds were fabricated by the solution evaporation technique. The morphology, phase composition and the mechanical properties of the composite scaffolds were characterized and the cellular bioactivity of the scaffolds was assessed by using rat bone-marrow-derived stroma cells (BMSCs). The attachment, proliferation and differentiation of the BMSCs on the composite scaffolds were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole dihydrochloride (DAPI) nuclear staining and fluorescein diacetate (FDA) and propidium iodide (PI) live/dead staining, methylthiazol tetrazolium (MU) assay and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity assay, respectively. Results showed that mechanical properties of the composite scaffolds were improved with the addition of MWNTs (0.25-2 wt%). BMSCs on the composite scaffolds differentiated down the osteogenic lineage and expressed high levels of bone marker ALP. The scaffolds with low concentration (0.5 wt%) of MWNTs can enhance the proliferation and differentiation of the BMSCs more than that with higher concentration of MWNTs. It is concluded that MWNTs/PCL composite scaffolds have the potential for bone tissue engineering and the relatively low concentration of MWNTs (0.5 wt%) is preferred. (c) 2012 Elsevier B.V. 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