4.6 Article

Magnesium Ammonium Phosphate Composite Cell-Laden Hydrogel Promotes Osteogenesis and Angiogenesis In Vitro

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 6, 期 14, 页码 9449-9459

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c06083

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81921002, 81620108006, 81991505]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFC1102900]
  3. Doctoral Innovation Fund Projects of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine [SSMU-ZDCX20180900]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Injectable hydrogels, incorporating struvite into GelMA, demonstrated improved osteoinductive properties and enhanced angiogenesis. The composite did not affect GelMA cross-linking and released Mg2+ during degradation, consequently improving cell migration. This modification of GelMA holds great potential for vascularized bone tissue regeneration.
Injectable hydrogels provide an effective strategy for minimally invasive treatment on irregular bony defects in the maxillofacial region. To improve the osteoinduction of gelatin methacrylate (GelMA), we fabricated a three-dimensional (3D) culture system based on the incorporation of magnesium ammonium phosphate hexahydrate (struvite) into GelMA. The optimal concentration of struvite was investigated using the struvite extracts, and 500 mu g mL(-1) was found to be the most suitable concentration for the osteogenesis of dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) and angiogenesis of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). We prepared the GelMA composite (MgP) with 500 mu g mL(-1) struvite. Struvite did not affect the cross-linking of GelMA and released Mg2+ during degradation. The cell delivery system using MgP improved the laden-cell viability, upregulated the expression of osteogenic and angiogenic-differentiation-related genes, and promoted cell migration. Overall, the modifications made to the GelMA in this study improved osteoinduction and demonstrated great potential for application in vascularized bone tissue regeneration.

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

4.6
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