3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Gelatin—alginate—cerium oxide nanocomposite scaffold for bone regeneration

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          How useful is SBF in predicting in vivo bone bioactivity?

          The bone-bonding ability of a material is often evaluated by examining the ability of apatite to form on its surface in a simulated body fluid (SBF) with ion concentrations nearly equal to those of human blood plasma. However, the validity of this method for evaluating bone-bonding ability has not been assessed systematically. Here, the history of SBF, correlation of the ability of apatite to form on various materials in SBF with their in vivo bone bioactivities, and some examples of the development of novel bioactive materials based on apatite formation in SBF are reviewed. It was concluded that examination of apatite formation on a material in SBF is useful for predicting the in vivo bone bioactivity of a material, and the number of animals used in and the duration of animal experiments can be reduced remarkably by using this method.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis.

            Porosity and pore size of biomaterial scaffolds play a critical role in bone formation in vitro and in vivo. This review explores the state of knowledge regarding the relationship between porosity and pore size of biomaterials used for bone regeneration. The effect of these morphological features on osteogenesis in vitro and in vivo, as well as relationships to mechanical properties of the scaffolds, are addressed. In vitro, lower porosity stimulates osteogenesis by suppressing cell proliferation and forcing cell aggregation. In contrast, in vivo, higher porosity and pore size result in greater bone ingrowth, a conclusion that is supported by the absence of reports that show enhanced osteogenic outcomes for scaffolds with low void volumes. However, this trend results in diminished mechanical properties, thereby setting an upper functional limit for pore size and porosity. Thus, a balance must be reached depending on the repair, rate of remodeling and rate of degradation of the scaffold material. Based on early studies, the minimum requirement for pore size is considered to be approximately 100 microm due to cell size, migration requirements and transport. However, pore sizes >300 microm are recommended, due to enhanced new bone formation and the formation of capillaries. Because of vascularization, pore size has been shown to affect the progression of osteogenesis. Small pores favored hypoxic conditions and induced osteochondral formation before osteogenesis, while large pores, that are well-vascularized, lead to direct osteogenesis (without preceding cartilage formation). Gradients in pore sizes are recommended for future studies focused on the formation of multiple tissues and tissue interfaces. New fabrication techniques, such as solid-free form fabrication, can potentially be used to generate scaffolds with morphological and mechanical properties more selectively designed to meet the specificity of bone-repair needs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Recent advances in bone tissue engineering scaffolds.

              Bone disorders are of significant concern due to increase in the median age of our population. Traditionally, bone grafts have been used to restore damaged bone. Synthetic biomaterials are now being used as bone graft substitutes. These biomaterials were initially selected for structural restoration based on their biomechanical properties. Later scaffolds were engineered to be bioactive or bioresorbable to enhance tissue growth. Now scaffolds are designed to induce bone formation and vascularization. These scaffolds are often porous, made of biodegradable materials that harbor different growth factors, drugs, genes, or stem cells. In this review, we highlight recent advances in bone scaffolds and discuss aspects that still need to be improved. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Materials Science and Engineering: C
                Materials Science and Engineering: C
                Elsevier BV
                09284931
                November 2020
                November 2020
                : 116
                : 111111
                Article
                10.1016/j.msec.2020.111111
                4c92f183-9787-444a-94a1-7adeba5a0b8a
                © 2020

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article