4.7 Article

Response of osteoblasts and preosteoblasts to calcium deficient and Si substituted hydroxyapatites treated at different temperatures

期刊

COLLOIDS AND SURFACES B-BIOINTERFACES
卷 133, 期 -, 页码 304-313

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2015.06.014

关键词

Hydroxyapatite; Osteoblast; Preosteoblast; Scaffold; Fibrinogen

资金

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [MAT2012-35556]
  2. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad [MAT2013-43299-R]
  3. Agening Network of Excellence [CSO2010-11384-E]
  4. MEC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydroxyapatite (HA) is a calcium phosphate bioceramic widely used for bone grafting and augmentation purposes. The biological response of HA can be improved through chemical and microstructural modifications, as well as by manufacturing it as macroporous implants. In the present study, calcium deficient hydroxyapatite (CDHA) and Si substituted hydroxyapatite (SiHA) macroporous scaffolds have been prepared by robocasting. In order to obtain different microstructural properties, the scaffolds have been treated at 700 degrees C and 1250 degrees C. The scaffolds have been characterized and tested as supports for both osteoblast growth and pre-osteoblast differentiation, as fundamental requisite for their potential use in bone tissue engineering. Morphology, viability, adhesion, proliferation, cell cycle, apoptosis, intracellular content of reactive oxygen species and interleukin-6 production were evaluated after contact of osteoblasts-like cells with CDHA and SiHA materials. An adequate interaction of osteoblasts-like cells and preosteoblasts-like cells with all these scaffolds was observed. However, the higher bone cell proliferation and differentiation on CDHA and SiHA scaffolds treated at 1250 degrees C and the lower adsorption of albumin and fibrinogen on these materials in comparison to those treated at 700 degrees C, suggest a better tissue response to CDHA and SiHA materials treated at high temperature. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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