4.8 Article

Osteoblast function on electrically conductive electrospun PLA/MWCNTs nanofibers

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 32, 期 11, 页码 2821-2833

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.051

关键词

Biodegradable; Carbon nanotube; Electrospinning; Conductive; Nanofiber

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30970723]
  2. Ministry of Education of China [NCET-07-0719]
  3. Sichuan Prominent Young Talent Program [08ZQ026-040]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrospinning process was utilized successfully to fabricate the random oriented and aligned electrically conductive nanofibers of biodegradable poly-DL-lactide (PLA) in which multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) were embedded. The topographical features of the composite nanofibers were characterized by SEM. The dispersion and alignment of MWCNTs in nanofiber matrix were observed by TEM. The in vitro degradation was characterized in terms of the morphological change, the mass loss and the reduction of polymer molecular weight as well as the decrease of pH value of degradation media. In particular, these conductive nanofiber meshes offered a unique system to study the synergistic effect of topographic cues and electrical stimulation on osteoblasts outgrowth as a way of exploring their potential application in bone tissue engineering. The results of obsteoblasts assay unstimulated showed that the aligned nanofibers as topographic cues could enhance the extension and direct the outgrowth of obsteoblasts better than random fibers. In the presence of direct current (DC) of 100 mu A, the obsteoblasts on all samples grew along the electrical current direction. The cellular elongation and proliferation were mainly dependent on the electrical stimulation whereas the topographical features played a minor role in them. Therefore, electrical stimulation with an appropriate DC value imparted on conductive substrate had great potential in application of bone tissue engineering. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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