Protein expression profiles in osteoblasts in response to differentially shaped hydroxyapatite nanoparticles

Xu, Jiahao; Khor, K.A.; Sui, Jianjun; Zhang, Jianhua; Chen, William Wei Ning

doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.07.002

Cited by 115 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All samples show the characteristic three peaks residing between 31 and 33° (2θ), representing (211), (112), (300) planes and a more crystalline peak at 26° (2θ) representing the (002) plane of HA [45]. The additional peaks were identified as belonging to unreacted calcite or aragonite, matched by the patterns (PDF 47-1473) and (PDF 41-1475) respectively.…”

Section: Chemical Analysismentioning

confidence: 84%

An in vitro Study to Assess the Potential of a Unique Micro porous Algal Derived Cap Bone Void Filler in Comparison with Clinically-Used Bone Void Fillers

Walsh¹

2011

J Tissue Sci Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Chemical Analysismentioning

confidence: 84%

An in vitro Study to Assess the Potential of a Unique Micro porous Algal Derived Cap Bone Void Filler in Comparison with Clinically-Used Bone Void Fillers

Walsh¹

2011

J Tissue Sci Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…114 However, needle-shaped as well as spherical hydroxyapatite nanoparticles decreased osteoblast cell numbers in a different study. 115 With respect to nanoparticle size, the findings again diverged. On the one hand, hydroxyapatite and titania nanoparticles of up to 40 nm diameter decreased osteoblastic cell proliferation and viability, respectively.…”

Section: Osteoblastsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…116 In contrast, phosphonate-functionalized nanoparticles did not affect the expression of osteoclast-regulating genes in primary human osteoblasts. 112 Further examined effects of nanoparticles on osteoblasts comprised DNA damage, confirmed for hydroxyapatite nanoparticles in osteoblastic cells, 115 and titania particles in various murine organs, including bone marrow. 124 Furthermore, a possible improvement in implant fixation by applying nanoparticle coatings was investigated.…”

Section: Osteoblastsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanoparticles and their potential for application in bone

Tautzenberger¹,

Kovtun²,

Ignatius³

2012

IJN

163

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Biomaterials are commonly applied in regenerative therapy and tissue engineering in bone, and have been substantially refined in recent years. Thereby, research approaches focus more and more on nanoparticles, which have great potential for a variety of applications. Generally, nanoparticles interact distinctively with bone cells and tissue, depending on their composition, size, and shape. Therefore, detailed analyses of nanoparticle effects on cellular functions have been performed to select the most suitable candidates for supporting bone regeneration. This review will highlight potential nanoparticle applications in bone, focusing on cell labeling as well as drug and gene delivery. Labeling, eg, of mesenchymal stem cells, which display exceptional regenerative potential, makes monitoring and evaluation of cell therapy approaches possible. By including bioactive molecules in nanoparticles, locally and temporally controlled support of tissue regeneration is feasible, eg, to directly influence osteoblast differentiation or excessive osteoclast behavior. In addition, the delivery of genetic material with nanoparticulate carriers offers the possibility of overcoming certain disadvantages of standard protein delivery approaches, such as aggregation in the bloodstream during systemic therapy. Moreover, nanoparticles are already clinically applied in cancer treatment. Thus, corresponding efforts could lead to new therapeutic strategies to improve bone regeneration or to treat bone disorders.

show abstract

“…An in vitro study in protein expression profiles of osteoblasts cultured on HA nanoparticles showed an upregulation of the osteogenic genes ALP and OC, and the regulation of several genes involved in Ca metabolism [74]. Investigations in the rabbit revealed a very early bone ingrowth of Si substituted porous HA implants in contrast to stoichiometric HA by using a Si level of 0.8wt% [67].…”

Section: Characterization and Preparation Of Synthetic Hamentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular, Cellular and Pharmaceutical Aspects of Synthetic Hydroxyapatite Bone Substitutes for Oral and Maxillofacial Grafting

Götz¹,

Papageorgiou²

2017

CPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone grafts are widely used for augmentation procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery, with autogenous bone being the gold standard. Recently, the focus of research has shifted towards synthetic bone substitutes, as no second surgery is needed and large quantities of graft can easily be provided. Within the broad range of bone substitutes, synthetic hydroxyapatite has drawn much attention, as they are considered to be biocompatible, non-immunogenic, osteoconductive and osteoinductive. Scope of this review is to summarize existing knowledge concerning the molecular, cellular and pharmaceutical aspects of synthetic bone substitutes for oral and maxillofacial grafting.

show abstract

Protein expression profiles in osteoblasts in response to differentially shaped hydroxyapatite nanoparticles

Cited by 115 publications

References 22 publications

An in vitro Study to Assess the Potential of a Unique Micro porous Algal Derived Cap Bone Void Filler in Comparison with Clinically-Used Bone Void Fillers

An in vitro Study to Assess the Potential of a Unique Micro porous Algal Derived Cap Bone Void Filler in Comparison with Clinically-Used Bone Void Fillers

Nanoparticles and their potential for application in bone

Molecular, Cellular and Pharmaceutical Aspects of Synthetic Hydroxyapatite Bone Substitutes for Oral and Maxillofacial Grafting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About