Graphene-containing PCL- coated Porous 13-93B3 Bioactive Glass Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration

Türk, Mert; Deliormanlı, Aylin M.

doi:10.1088/2053-1591/aab87b

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…32042090). 19 Briefly, cells were cultured on a scaffold for 2 days in DMEM high glucose cell culture medium, and post-incubation 30 μl calcein AM was added to the scaffold. The scaffold was incubated for 10 min at 37 °C temperature and 5% CO 2 incubator, after that 10 μl PI dye was introduced.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functionally gradient three-dimensional graphene foam-based polymeric scaffolds for multilayered tissue regeneration

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functionally gradient three-dimensional graphene foam-based polymeric scaffolds for multilayered tissue regeneration

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Luo et al [ 144 ] found that the addition of G had a negative impact on cell adhesion, whilst GO presented a positive effect. Türk et al [ 170 ] also found cytotoxicity when G was introduced into a matrix composed of Bioglass. However, several studies [ 93 , 143 ] reported no cytotoxicity when G was introduced in scaffolds ( Figure 4 and Figure 5 ).…”

Section: Carbon-based Nanomaterialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Live (green) and dead (red) MC3T3-E1 cells seeded on poly ε-caprolactone (PCL)-coated bioactive glass with different percentages of graphene. ( a – c ) Without graphene, ( d – f ) 1 wt.% graphene (G), ( g – i ) 3 wt.% G, ( j – l ) 5 wt.% G and ( m – p ) 10 wt.% G. After 7 days, the density of cells on G-containing scaffolds was higher than without G. However, after 14 days of incubation, a decrease in cell viability is observed due to the presence of G (reprinted from [ 170 ] with permission from Elsevier). …”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, several studies [93,143] reported no cytotoxicity when G was introduced in scaffolds (Figures 4 and 5). (d-f) 1 wt.% graphene (G), (g-i) 3 wt.% G, (j-l) 5 wt.% G and (m-p) 10 wt.% G. After 7 days, the density of cells on Gcontaining scaffolds was higher than without G. However, after 14 days of incubation, a decrease in cell viability is observed due to the presence of G (reprinted from [170] with permission from Elsevier). (d-f) 1 wt.% graphene (G), (g-i) 3 wt.% G, (j-l) 5 wt.% G and (m-p) 10 wt.% G. After 7 days, the density of cells on G-containing scaffolds was higher than without G. However, after 14 days of incubation, a decrease in cell viability is observed due to the presence of G (reprinted from [170] with permission from Elsevier).…”

Section: Limitations and Toxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advances in Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds with Carbon-Based Nanomaterials for Bone Regeneration

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone possesses an inherent capacity to fix itself. However, when a defect larger than a critical size appears, external solutions must be applied. Traditionally, an autograft has been the most used solution in these situations. However, it presents some issues such as donor-site morbidity. In this context, porous biodegradable scaffolds have emerged as an interesting solution. They act as external support for cell growth and degrade when the defect is repaired. For an adequate performance, these scaffolds must meet specific requirements: biocompatibility, interconnected porosity, mechanical properties and biodegradability. To obtain the required porosity, many methods have conventionally been used (e.g., electrospinning, freeze-drying and salt-leaching). However, from the development of additive manufacturing methods a promising solution for this application has been proposed since such methods allow the complete customisation and control of scaffold geometry and porosity. Furthermore, carbon-based nanomaterials present the potential to impart osteoconductivity and antimicrobial properties and reinforce the matrix from a mechanical perspective. These properties make them ideal for use as nanomaterials to improve the properties and performance of scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. This work explores the potential research opportunities and challenges of 3D printed biodegradable composite-based scaffolds containing carbon-based nanomaterials for bone tissue engineering applications.

show abstract

“…In the presented research two types of graphene derivatives were used to obtain polymer (PCL) nanocomposites: graphene oxide (GO) and partially reduced graphene oxide (rGO). The GO have functional, oxygen-containing groups attached to their surface that gives them unique properties, hydrophilic character that prevents their aggregation in water, and also improves their biocompatibility and ability of blending with the polar polymers such as PCL [8,17]. Graphene materials are also considered to be especially attractive compared to any other carbon nanomaterials because of their lower levels of metallic impurities [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Raman Spectroscopic Analysis of Polymer Membranes with Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, despite significant advances in the field of biomaterials for tissue engineering applications, novel bone substituents still need refinement so they can be successfully implemented into the medical treatment of bone fractures. Generally, a scaffold made of synthetic polymer blended with nanofillers was proven to be a very promising biomaterial for tissue engineering, however the choice of components for the said scaffold remains questionable. The objects of the presented study were novel composites consisting of poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) and two types of graphene materials: graphene oxide (GO) and partially reduced graphene oxide (rGO). The technique of choice, that was used to characterize the obtained composites, was Raman micro-spectroscopy. It revealed that the composite PCL/GO differs substantially from the PCL/rGO composite. The incorporation of the GO particles into the polymer influenced the structure organisation of the polymeric matrix more significantly than rGO. The crystallinity parameters confirmed that the level of crystallinity is generally higher in the PCL/GO membrane in comparison to PCL/rGO (and even in raw PCL) that leads to the conclusion that the GO acts as a nucleation agent enhancing the crystallization of PCL. Interestingly, the characteristics of the studied nanofillers, for example: the level of the organisation (D/G ratio) and the in-plane size of the nano-crystallites (La) almost do not differ. However, they have an ability to influence polymeric matrix differently.

show abstract

Graphene-containing PCL- coated Porous 13-93B3 Bioactive Glass Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration

Cited by 18 publications

References 37 publications

Functionally gradient three-dimensional graphene foam-based polymeric scaffolds for multilayered tissue regeneration

Functionally gradient three-dimensional graphene foam-based polymeric scaffolds for multilayered tissue regeneration

Advances in Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds with Carbon-Based Nanomaterials for Bone Regeneration

A Raman Spectroscopic Analysis of Polymer Membranes with Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About