4.5 Article

Single walled carbon nanotube composites for bone tissue engineering

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC RESEARCH
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 1374-1381

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jor.22379

关键词

PLAGA; SWCNT; SWCNT; PLAGA composites; musculoskeletal regeneration; bone tissue engineering

资金

  1. School of Medicine, Southern Illinois University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to develop single walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) and poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLAGA) composites for orthopedic applications and to evaluate the interaction of human stem cells (hBMSCs) and osteoblasts (MC3T3-E1 cells) via cell growth, proliferation, gene expression, extracellular matrix production and mineralization. PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA composites were fabricated with various amounts of SWCNT (5, 10, 20, 40, and 100mg), characterized and degradation studies were performed. Cells were seeded and cell adhesion/morphology, growth/survival, proliferation and gene expression analysis were performed to evaluate biocompatibility. Imaging studies demonstrated uniform incorporation of SWCNT into the PLAGA matrix and addition of SWCNT did not affect the degradation rate. Imaging studies revealed that MC3T3-E1 and hBMSCs cells exhibited normal, non-stressed morphology on the composites and all were biocompatible. Composites with 10mg SWCNT resulted in highest rate of cell proliferation (p<0.05) among all composites. Gene expression of alkaline phosphatase, collagen I, osteocalcin, osteopontin, Runx-2, and Bone Sialoprotein was observed on all composites. In conclusion, SWCNT/PLAGA composites imparted beneficial cellular growth capabilities and gene expression, and mineralization abilities were well established. These results demonstrate the potential of SWCNT/PLAGA composites for musculoskeletal regeneration and bone tissue engineering (BTE) and are promising for orthopedic applications. (c) 2013 Orthopaedic Research Society Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 31:1374-1381, 2013

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