4.5 Article

Beta-tricalcium phosphate release from brushite cement surface

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.31381

关键词

brushite; cement; disintegration; cohesion; beta-TCP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Different in vivo studies demonstrated that brushite cements are biocompatible, bioresorbable, and osteoconductive. However, the decay of brushite cements has been scarcely studied even though it may be of great concern for clinical applications in highly blood-perfused regions. This work was elaborated to elucidate factors that determine brushite cement surface disintegration. For that, brushite cements were modified using in their preparation different aqueous solutions of phosphoric, glycolic, tartaric, and citric acids in concentrations that were reported to improve the cement properties. Two-viscosity enhancing polysaccharides, chondroitin-4 sulfate and hyaluronic acid, were also assayed. Thereafter, pre- and set cement samples were immersed in distilled water for 24 h. The cement-solid weight loss, microstructure, liquid phase viscosity, mean size of the released particles, and zeta potential were analyzed using X-ray diffraction, FTIR spectroscopy, light scattering, scanning electron microscopy and optical microscopy. It was found that the particles released from the cement surface were beta-TCP, and their amount depends on the carboxylic acid used in the preparation of the cement. The addition of hyaluronic acid and chondroitin-4 sulfate decreased the amount of released particles from the surface of the set brushite cement made with citric acid. Furthermore, the hyaluronic acid increased significantly the viscosity of the citric acid solution and the cement paste prepared with this liquid phase showed a pronounced step down in particle release. In this study, we showed that the water solubility of calcium carboxylate and the viscosity of mixing liquid may dictate the superficial disintegration of brushite cements. (C) 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据