4.4 Article

Strontium ranelate changes the composition and crystal structure of the biological bone-like apatite produced in osteoblast cell cultures

期刊

CELL AND TISSUE RESEARCH
卷 357, 期 3, 页码 793-801

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00441-014-1901-1

关键词

Strontium ranelate; Apatite crystal; Bone mineral; Osteoblast cells; Biomineralization

资金

  1. CNPq (Brazil)
  2. FAPERJ (Brazil)
  3. FINEP (Brazil)
  4. CAPES/COFECUB (Brazil/France) [628/09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We evaluate the effects of strontium ranelate on the composition and crystal structure of the biological bone-like apatite produced in osteoblast cell cultures, a system that gave us the advantage of obtaining mineral samples produced exclusively during treatment. Cells were treated with strontium ranelate at concentrations of 0.05 and 0.5 mM Sr2+. Mineral substances were isolated and analyzed by using a combination of methods: Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, solid-state H-1 nuclear magnetic resonance, X-ray diffraction, micro-Raman spectroscopy and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. The minerals produced in all cell cultures were typical bone-like apatites. No changes occurred in the local structural order or crystal size of the minerals. However, we noticed several relevant changes in the mineral produced under 0.5 mM Sr2+: (1) increase in type-B CO3 (2-) substitutions, which often lead to the creation of vacancies in Ca2+ and OH- sites; (2) incorporation of Sr2+ by substituting slightly less than 10 % of Ca2+ in the apatite crystal lattice, resulting in an increase in both lattice parameters a and c; (3) change in the PO4 (3-) environments, possibly because of the expansion of the lattice; (4) the Ca/P ratio of this mineral was reduced, but its (Ca+Sr)/P ratio was the same as that of the control, indicating that its overall cation/P ratio was preserved. Thus, strontium ranelate changes the composition and crystal structure of the biological bone-like apatite produced in osteoblast cell cultures.

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

4.4
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