Influence of ZnO thin film crystallinity on in vitro biocompatibility

Abstract

This study evaluated the cytocompatibility of single- and poly-crystalline ZnO thin films using extract and direct contact methods. Exposure to poly-crystalline ZnO extract resulted in reduced cell viability, on average 82%/70% as measured by MTS/LDH assays, respectively. Direct exposure to both single- and poly-crystalline ZnO thin films resulted in reduced cell viability, which was attributed to anoikis due to inhibition of cell adhesion to the substrate by zinc. Intracellular zinc imaging suggests that single crystalline ZnO thin films do not result in a significant change in intracellular zinc concentrations. Overall, the results suggest that single-crystalline ZnO thin films have better short-term (24 h) cytocompatibility and support their potential to serve as a biocompatible sensor material.

Review of Antimicrobial Nanocoatings in Medicine and Dentistry: Mechanisms of Action, Biocompatibility Performance, Safety, and Benefits Compared to Antibiotics

“…A more recent study investigating the in vitro biocompatibility of ZnO nanofilms at the nanoscale found that direct exposure to ZnO nanofilms reduced cell viability of mouse fibroblasts due to inhibition of cell adhesion, regardless of ZnO crystallinity. 154 This study appears to agree with that published by Petrochenko et al 153 and provides further evidence of the adverse effects of ZnO nanocoatings on eukaryotic ( i.e. , host) cells, leading to concerns over the safety and biocompatibility of ZnO nanocoatings in vivo .…”

“…Research efforts to address the biocompatibility of ZnO nanocoatings have been scant, with most studies looking at ZnO coatings at particle sizes greater than the nanoscale. A more recent study investigating the in vitro biocompatibility of ZnO nanofilms at the nanoscale found that direct exposure to ZnO nanofilms reduced cell viability of mouse fibroblasts due to inhibition of cell adhesion, regardless of ZnO crystallinity . This study appears to agree with that published by Petrochenko et al and provides further evidence of the adverse effects of ZnO nanocoatings on eukaryotic ( i.e.…”

“…Two diluted coating extracts, 25% and 50% (corresponding to concentrations of 3.03 and 6.07 μg mL −1 , respectively) showed no cytotoxic effects against macrophages, indicating a tolerable concentration of ZnO NPs, but it was unclear whether these concentrations would have an antimicrobial effect. Petrochenko et al 153 highlighted the importance of using both direct-exposure and extract-based methods to assess toxicity, as nanocoatings show gradual material release which can accumulate to a toxic level over time and extracts can simulate the result of this 154 This study appears to agree with that published by Petrochenko et al 153 and provides further evidence of the adverse effects of ZnO nanocoatings on eukaryotic (i.e., host) cells, leading to concerns over the safety and biocompatibility of ZnO nanocoatings in vivo. Titanium Nanocoatings.…”

Zinc-Based Biomaterials for Regeneration and Therapy

“…However, other nanostructures (e.g. nanowires, nanorods) or thin films have been reported with significantly improved cytocompatibility [78,79], especially when composited with other inorganic and organic agents [80], which is another potential direction for Zn-based nanomaterials.…”

Polymer-based porous microcarriers as cell delivery systems for applications in bone and cartilage tissue engineering

“…Cytocompatible and biocompatible materials are beneficial to improving the survival rate of loaded cells and alleviating the host response induced by microcarrier implantation [57,58]. Typically, cytocompatibility and biocompatibility can be influenced by both bulk and surface properties [59][60][61][62]. Parameters that influence cytocompatibility and biocompatibility include degradation and toxicity, implant size, charge, hydrophobic-hydrophilic balance, and surface finish (smooth, rough, and surface porosity), among others [61].…”