4.2 Article

Porous TiO2 Nanotube Arrays for Drug Loading and Their Elution Sensing

期刊

JOURNAL OF NANOSCIENCE AND NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 1743-1748

出版社

AMER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1166/jnn.2019.16243

关键词

Porous TiO2 Nanotube Arrays; Interferometric Sensor; Dental Implant; rhBMP-2; Isobutylphenyl Propionic Acid; Sodium Alendronate; Drug Delivery

资金

  1. Local University Excellent Scientist Supporting Program through the Ministry of Education and National Research Foundation of Korea [2015H1C1A1035848, 2017R1D1A3B03036068]
  2. Human Resource Training Program for Regional Innovation and Creativity
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1D1A3B03036068, 2015H1C1A1035848] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Porous TiO2 nanotube arrays have been attracting much attention as optical sensing layers and surface layers of dental implants because they are stable in acid and biocompatible. To use them as the optical sensing layers, TiO2 nanotube arrays with various structures were fabricated and obtained an optimized microstructure at 50 V, 50 min and 0.5 wt% of NH4F, 7.4 vol% deionized water in ethylene glycol. TiO2 nanotube arrays which had diameters of similar to 73.54 nm and lengths of similar to 3.39 mu m showed the best sensing performance. A Ti implant was also anodized at 60 V for 4 hr in an ethylene glycol electrolyte and TiO2 nanotube arrays showed the pore diameter of 156.01 nm and the thickness of 6.87 mu m. Recombinant human bonemorphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2), isobutylphenyl propionic acid, and sodium alendronate were loaded into the TiO2 nanotube arrays on the surface of the Ti implant. For elution of these drugs, optical thickness changes of 2.4 nm, 3.5 nm and 3.1 nm were respectively observed for about 2.2 hr, 3.6 hr and 3.1 hr. The TiO2 nanotube arrays were useful for drug loading and their elution interferometric sensing.

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

4.2
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