Fabrication of monticellite-akermanite nanocomposite powder for tissue engineering applications

Shamoradi, Fatemeh; Emadi, Rahmatollah; Ghomi, Hamed

doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.09.219

Cited by 23 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Various types of bioceramics have been used for treating bone defects [7, 18–20], but they have some drawbacks such as weak mechanical properties and chemical stability, which limit their clinical applications [21]. To address these issues, many composite systems have been explored as bone substitute materials, including HA reinforced polyethylene, polylactide, collagen, and Polyactive™ [22–25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical analysis of a novel height-adjustable nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 vertebral body: a finite element study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo compare the biomechanical properties of a novel height-adjustable nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 vertebral body (HAVB) with the titanium mesh cage (TMC) and artificial vertebral body (AVB), and evaluate its biomechanical efficacy in spinal stability reconstruction.MethodsA 3D nonliner FE model of the intact L1-sacrum was established and validated. Three FE models which instrumented HAVB, TMC, and AVB were constructed for surgical simulation. A pure moment of 7.5 Nm and a 400-N preload were applied to the three FE models in 3D motion. The peak von Mises stress upon each prosthesis and the interfaced endplate was recorded for analysis. In addition, the overall and intersegmental range of motion (ROM) of each model was investigated to assess the efficacy of each model in spinal stability reconstruction.ResultsAVB had the greatest stress concentration compared with TMC and HAVB in all motions (25.6–101.8 times of HAVB, 0.8–8.1 times of TMC). The peak stress on HAVB was 3.1–10.3% of TMC and 1.6–3.9% of AVB. The maximum stress values on L2 caudal and L4 cranial endplates are different between the three FE models: 0.9–1.9, 1.3–12.1, and 31.3–117.9 times of the intact model on L2 caudal endplates and 0.9–3.5, 7.2–31.5, and 10.3–56.4 times of the intact model on L4 cranial endplates in HAVB, TMC, and AVB, respectively, while the overall and segmental ROM reduction was similar between the three models, with AVB providing a relatively higher ROM reduction in all loading conditions (88.1–84.7% of intact model for overall ROM and 69.5–82.1% for L1/2, 87.0–91.7% for L2/4, and 71.1–87.2% for L4/5, respectively).ConclusionsHAVB had similar biomechanical efficacy in spinal stability reconstruction as compared with TMC and AVB. The material used and the anatomic design of HAVB can help avoid stress concentration and the stress shielding effect, thus greatly reducing the implant-associated complications. HAVB exhibited some advantageous biomechanical properties over TMC and AVB and may prove to be a potentially viable option for spinal stability reconstruction. Further in vivo and vitro studies are still required to validate our findings and conclusions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical analysis of a novel height-adjustable nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 vertebral body: a finite element study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bioceramics can establish chemical bonding with the natural bone tissue, [ 26 ] whereas polymers usually have no or limited free chemical bonds to interact with natural bone tissue. [ 27 ] Additionally, bioceramics dissolution byproducts mostly can be found and/or absorbed by natural bones, [ 28 ] whereas the degradation products of synthetic polymers should usually be eliminated from the environment because of inflammatory risks. [ 29 ]…”

Section: Biomaterials Scaffoldmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Does Scaffold Porosity Conduct Bone Tissue Regeneration?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite progresses in tissue healing, repairing large bone defects remains an unmet challenge. Tissue engineering (TE) using porous scaffolds offers great promise in providing solutions by which bone healing can be increased, and the need for further surgical intervention can be reduced. Nonetheless, the successful performance of a porous scaffold depends on key structural factors including porosity, pore size, geometry, and interconnectivity. Herein, recent advancements on this topic are reviewed and the effects of fabrication methods on making potential scaffolds for advanced bone regeneration are discussed.The upward trend of population aging, increased numbers of accidents, sport injuries, trauma, and bone tumor resection are increasing the demand for substitutes to regenerate and/or repair damaged skeletal and dental bones. [1] Bone tissue poses a simple yet highly organized ultracomposition in which each portion plays a pivotal role in moderating the elasticity and strength of the bone. [2] The intrinsically dynamic bone tissue structure allows the restoration of damaged parts via the self-healing process. [3] This remodeling process is dependent on the dynamic equilibrium between the bone-forming (osteoblast) and bone-resorbing cells (osteoclast) during mechanical stimulation. [4] Nevertheless, this healing process is not sufficient for repairing massive and critical bone defects; thus, there is a need for drastic healing accelerators and substitutive or supportive therapeutics. [5] Specially, the regenerating of large bone defects is a serious and challenging clinical issue. To address the issue, different types of bone graft substitutes such as autografts, allografts, and xenografts are used. [6] These grafts, however, come with certain drawbacks, including donor site morbidity and limited supply. Moreover, aged persons cannot provide rich bone tissue for their own tissue replacement due to osteoporosis. [7] To address the limitations associated with natural bone-derived substitutes, biomaterials have been developed during recent decades. [8] Engineering biomaterials made it possible to simulate the bone microenvironment and construct programmable scaffolds for purposeful therapeutic procedures. Bioactive ceramic materials are favorable for bone tissue engineering (BTE) due to their resemblance to the mineral phase of bone, and direct bonding with host bone tissue without the formation of fibrous tissue. In addition, the variety in the chemical composition of bioceramics, particularly silicate-based ceramics (SiCa), can contribute to adjustments in mechanical properties, bioactivity, and biodegradability.A fundamental constituent of engineering tissue is the scaffold, which acts as the structural template providing a suitable substrate for cell proliferation, differentiation, and attachment resulting in new tissue formation. In tissue engineering (TE), the scaffold serves as the structural guide and the substrate for cell anchorage. The scaffold also contributes to the remodeling of the extracellular mat...

show abstract

“…Thus, MgO and SiO 2 pair showed the electronegativity difference of 0.47 while CaO and MgO revealed the electronegativity difference of 0.22 [29]. Therefore, enstatite may be formed first according to the following reaction at 300 °C: MgO + SiO 2 − −− → MgSiO 3 (7) This enstatite phase is unstable during heating [30], therefore, it is suggested that its removal would occur due to the formation of monticellite through the reaction between CaO and MgSiO 3 by increasing temperature. As it can be observed in Fig.…”

Section: Dta Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructure evolution, grain growth kinetics and mechanical properties of Ca2MgSi2O7 bioceramics sintered at various temperatures

Mohammadi

Ismail

Shariff

et al. 2021

PAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Akermanite (Ca2MgSi2O7) ceramic powders were prepared by a wet solid-state synthesis process using a mixture of oxide sources. The mechanism of phase formation included the formation of transition compounds such as diopside and merwinite. The compacted disks of the dried mixture were sintered at 1200, 1225 and 1250?C for different dwell times (2, 4 and 6 h). The effect of sintering temperature on the physical properties (relative density and diameter shrinkage), grain growth kinetics (grain growth activation energy) and mechanical properties (flexural strength) of the akermanite ceramics were evaluated. It was shown that the increase in sintering temperature from 1200 to 1250?C decreased the porosity and increased the diameter shrinkage and relative density of Ca2MgSi2O7 ceramics. The grain growth activation energy was also found to increase with the increase of sintering temperature. Finally, the increase in density yielded ceramics with high mechanical strength.

show abstract

Fabrication of monticellite-akermanite nanocomposite powder for tissue engineering applications

Cited by 23 publications

References 19 publications

Biomechanical analysis of a novel height-adjustable nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 vertebral body: a finite element study

Biomechanical analysis of a novel height-adjustable nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 vertebral body: a finite element study

How Does Scaffold Porosity Conduct Bone Tissue Regeneration?

Microstructure evolution, grain growth kinetics and mechanical properties of Ca2MgSi2O7 bioceramics sintered at various temperatures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About