4.7 Article

In Vitro??????? Evaluation of Biphasic Calcium Phosphate Scaffolds Derived from Cuttlefish Bone Coated with Poly(ester urea) for Bone Tissue Regeneration

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 15, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym15102256

关键词

cuttlefish bone; biphasic calcium phosphate; polymer coatings; in vitro cell culture; osteogenic differentiation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the osteogenic differentiation of hUC-MSCs on BCP scaffolds derived from cuttlefish bone doped with metal ions and coated with polymers. The most promising composition was found to be the BCP scaffold doped with Sr2+, Mg2+, and Zn2+ (BCP-6Sr2Mg2Zn). PEU-coated scaffolds provided a suitable environment for hUC-MSCs to proliferate, adhere to scaffold surfaces, and enhance their differentiation capabilities without negative effects on cell proliferation under in vitro conditions.
This study investigates the osteogenic differentiation of umbilical-cord-derived human mesenchymal stromal cells (hUC-MSCs) on biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) scaffolds derived from cuttlefish bone doped with metal ions and coated with polymers. First, the in vitro cytocompatibility of the undoped and ion-doped (Sr2+, Mg2+ and/or Zn2+) BCP scaffolds was evaluated for 72 h using Live/Dead staining and viability assays. From these tests, the most promising composition was found to be the BCP scaffold doped with strontium (Sr2+), magnesium (Mg2+) and zinc (Zn2+) (BCP-6Sr2Mg2Zn). Then, samples from the BCP-6Sr2Mg2Zn were coated with poly(?-caprolactone) (PCL) or poly(ester urea) (PEU). The results showed that hUC-MSCs can differentiate into osteoblasts, and hUC-MSCs seeded on the PEU-coated scaffolds proliferated well, adhered to the scaffold surfaces, and enhanced their differentiation capabilities without negative effects on cell proliferation under in vitro conditions. Overall, these results suggest that PEU-coated scaffolds are an alternative to PCL for use in bone regeneration, providing a suitable environment to maximally induce osteogenesis.

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

4.7
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