2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.04.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparative study of calcium phosphate formation on bioceramics in vitro and in vivo

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
158
2
7

Year Published

2009
2009
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 249 publications
(179 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
12
158
2
7
Order By: Relevance
“…In accordance with similar experiments observed in the literature the quantity and size of the grains deposited act as somewhat quantitative indicators of the ability to induce precipitation of Ca-P (confirmed by EDS), and observing the images obtained by SEM, no perceptible difference appears in the comparison between the two materials, within these parameters. The results of the experiments with SBF approached, visually, those obtained with other ceramic materials such as α-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) and bi-phasic hydroxyapatite/α-tricalcium phosphate (HA/TCP) 50 , and better than the results obtained with sintered Bioglasss® (BG) 51 In the contact tests with VERO cells there was also no difference between the samples. The biocompatible character of the materials is reinforced, even if there are no conclusive indexes, considering the absence of in vivo tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…In accordance with similar experiments observed in the literature the quantity and size of the grains deposited act as somewhat quantitative indicators of the ability to induce precipitation of Ca-P (confirmed by EDS), and observing the images obtained by SEM, no perceptible difference appears in the comparison between the two materials, within these parameters. The results of the experiments with SBF approached, visually, those obtained with other ceramic materials such as α-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) and bi-phasic hydroxyapatite/α-tricalcium phosphate (HA/TCP) 50 , and better than the results obtained with sintered Bioglasss® (BG) 51 In the contact tests with VERO cells there was also no difference between the samples. The biocompatible character of the materials is reinforced, even if there are no conclusive indexes, considering the absence of in vivo tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…Numerous studies report the formation of an apatite layer between bone and implant, up to 1000 mm in thickness [36,[47][48][49], commonly accepted to occur through a dissolution-reprecipitation process [47]. Composition and orientation of this layer is debated to date [50][51][52][53][54][55]. In our recent work, we employed ET for the study of the first biomaterial-bone interface in nanoscale three-dimensional resolution [36].…”
Section: (A) Hydroxyapatite-bone Interfacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…(4) Differences in calcium orthophosphate precipitation among the bioceramic surfaces were less noticeable in vitro than that in vivo. (5) β-TCP bioceramics showed a poor ability of calcium orthophosphate precipitation both in vitro and in vivo [639]. These findings clearly revealed that apatite formation in the physiological environments could not be confirmed as the common feature of bioceramics.…”
Section: Bioactivitymentioning
confidence: 92%
“…An important study on formation of calcium orthophosphate precipitates on various types of bioceramic surfaces in both simulated body fluid (SBF) and rabbit muscle sites was performed [639]. The http://ccaasmag.org/BIO bioceramics were sintered porous solids, including bioglass, glass-ceramics, α-TCP, β-TCP and HA.…”
Section: Bioactivitymentioning
confidence: 99%