Evaluation of physical, mechanical and biological properties of bioglass/titania scaffold coated with poly (3-hydroxybutyrate)-chitosan for bone tissue engineering applications

References

• Amini AR, Laurencin CT, Nukavarapu SP. Bone tissue engineering: recent advances and challenges. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 2012;40:5.
   Google Scholar
• Chen QZ, Thompson ID, Boccaccini AR. 45S5 bioglass®-derived glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006 Apr 1;27(11):2414–2425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baino F, Novajra G, Vitale-Brovarone C. Bioceramics and scaffolds: a winning combination for tissue engineering. A winning combination for tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2015 Dec;17(3):202.
   Google Scholar
• Li W 45S5 bioactive glass-based composite scaffolds with polymer coatings for bone tissue engineering therapeutics.
   Google Scholar
• Mahato A, Kundu B, Mukherjee P, et al. Applications of different bioactive glass and glass-ceramic materials for osteoconductivity and osteoinductivity. Trans Indian Ceram Soc. 2017 Jul 3;76(3):149–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boccardi E, Ciraldo FE, Boccaccini AR. Bioactive glass-ceramic scaffolds: Processing and properties. MRS Bull. 2017 Mar;42(3):226–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baino F, Fiorilli S, Vitale-Brovarone C. Bioactive glass-based materials with hierarchical porosity for medical applications: review of recent advances. Acta Biomater. 2016 Sep;15(42):18–32.
   Google Scholar
• Hench LL. Chronology of bioactive glass development and clinical applications. New J Glass Ceram. 2013 Apr 30;3(2):67.
   Google Scholar
• Rahaman MN, Day DE, Bal BS, Fu Q, Jung SB, Bonewald LF, Tomsia AP. Bioactive glass in tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2011 Jun 1;7(6):2355–2373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiume E, Barberi J, Verné E, et al. Bioactive glasses: From parent 45S5 composition to scaffold-assisted tissue-healing therapies. J Funct Biomater. 2018 Mar;9(1):24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vichery C, Nedelec JM. Bioactive glass nanoparticles: from synthesis to materials design for biomedical applications. Materials. 2016 Apr 14;9(4):288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaur G, Pandey OP, Singh K, et al. A review of bioactive glasses: their structure, properties, fabrication, and apatite formation. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014 Jan;102(1):254–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellucci D, Cannillo V, Sola A. A new highly bioactive composite for scaffold applications: A feasibility study. Materials. 2011;4(2):339–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stábile FM, Stagnaro SM, Ortiga J, et al. Production of porous scaffolds from bioglass 45S5-derived glasses. Procedia Mater Sci. 2015 Jan 1;9:558–562.
   Google Scholar
• Boccaccini AR, Chen Q, Lefebvre L, et al. Sintering, crystallization and biodegradation behavior of bioglass®-derived glass–ceramics. Faraday Discuss. 2007;136:27–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguilar-Reyes EA, León-Patiño CA, Villicaña-Molina E, et al. Processing and in vitro bioactivity of high-strength 45S5 glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone regeneration. Ceram Int. 2017 Jun 15;43(9):6868–6875.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nommeots-Nomm A, Labbaf S, Devlin A, et al. Highly degradable porous melt-derived bioactive glass foam scaffolds for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2017 Jul;15(57):449–461.
   Google Scholar
• Li W, Nooeaid P, Roether JA, et al. Preparation and characterization of vancomycin releasing PHBV coated 45S5 bioglass®-based glass–ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2014 Feb 1;34(2):505–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fostad G, Hafell B, Førde A, et al. Loadable TiO2 scaffolds—a correlation study between processing parameters, micro CT analysis, and mechanical strength. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2009 Oct 1;29(13):2773–2781.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BakhtiariSS, Karbasi S, Monshi A. Evaluation of the effects of nano-TiO^ sub 2^ on physical and mechanical properties of nano-bioglass 45S5 scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Scientia Iranica Trans F Nanotechnol. 2015 Jun 1;22(3):1337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Q, Roether JA, Boccaccini AR. Tissue engineering scaffolds from bioactive glass and composite materials. Top Tissue Eng. 2008;4(6):1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Philippart A, Boccaccini AR, Fleck C, et al. Toughening and functionalization of bioactive ceramic and glass bone scaffolds by biopolymer coatings and infiltration: a review of the last 5 years. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2015 Jan 2;12(1):93–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montazeri M, Karbasi S, Foroughi MR, et al. Evaluation of mechanical property and bioactivity of nano-bioglass 45S5 scaffold coated with poly-3-hydroxybutyrate. J Mater Sci. 2015 Feb 1;26(2):62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhtiyari SS, Karbasi S, Monshi A, et al. Evaluation of the effects of nano-TiO 2 on bioactivity and mechanical properties of nano bioglass-P3HB composite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Sci. 2016 Jan 1;27(1):2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahi S, Karbasi S. Evaluation of physical and mechanical properties of -tri-calcium phosphate/poly-3-hydroxybutyrate nanocomposite scaffold for bone tissue engineering application.2017.
   Google Scholar
• Foroughi MR, Karbasi S, Ebrahimi-Kahrizsangi R. Physical and mechanical properties of a poly-3-hydroxybutyrate-coated nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. J Porous Mater. 2012 Oct 1;19(5):667–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezwan K, Chen QZ, Blaker JJ, et al. Biodegradable and bioactive porous polymer/inorganic composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006 Jun 1;27(18):3413–3431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bretcanu O, Misra S, Roy I, et al. In vitro biocompatibility of 45S5 bioglass®‐derived glass–ceramic scaffolds coated with poly (3‐hydroxybutyrate). J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2009 Feb;3(2):139–148.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seoane IT, Manfredi LB, Cyras VP. Properties and processing relationship of polyhydroxybutyrate and cellulose biocomposites. Procedia Mater Sci. 2015. 1;Jan(8):807–813.
   Google Scholar
• Karbasi S, Khorasani SN, Ebrahimi S, et al. Preparation and characterization of poly (hydroxy butyrate)/chitosan blend scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Adv Biomed Res. 2016;5:177.
   Google Scholar
• Thein-Han WW, Kitiyanant Y, Misra RDK. Chitosan as scaffold matrix for tissue engineering. Mater Sci Technol. 2008 Sep 1;24(9):1062–1075.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depan D, Girase B, Shah JS, et al. Structure–process–property relationship of the polar graphene oxide-mediated cellular response and stimulated growth of osteoblasts on hybrid chitosan network structure nanocomposite scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2011 Sep 1;7(9):3432–3445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennings JA, Bumgardner JD, editors. Chitosan based biomaterials volume 2: tissue engineering and therapeutics: Woodhead Publishing,United kingdom,Elsevier,2016 Sep 28.
   Google Scholar
• Gholizadeh S, Moztarzadeh F, Haghighipour N, et al. Preparation and characterization of novel functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes/chitosan/β-Glycerophosphate scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Funct Biomater. 2017 Apr;1(97):365–372.
   Google Scholar
• Saravanan S, Leena RS, Selvamurugan N. Chitosan based biocomposite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2016 Dec;1(93):1354–1365.
   Google Scholar
• Wers E, Oudadesse H, Lefeuvre B, et al. Evaluation of the kinetic and relaxation time of gentamicin sulfate released from hybrid biomaterial Bioglass-chitosan scaffolds. Appl Surf Sci. 2015 Oct;30(353):200–208.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang T, James R, Kumbar SG, et al. Chitosan as a biomaterial: structure, properties, and applications in tissue engineering and drug delivery. In Natural and synthetic biomedical polymers.United States, Elsevier; 2014 Jan 1;91–113.
   Google Scholar
• Yuan Q, Shah J, Hein SR, et al. Controlled and extended drug release behavior of chitosan-based nanoparticle carrier. Acta Biomater. 2010 Mar 1;6(3):1140–1148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thein-Han WW, Saikhun J, Pholpramoo C, et al. Chitosan–gelatin scaffolds for tissue engineering: physico-chemical properties and biological response of buffalo embryonic stem cells and transfectant of GFP–buffalo embryonic stem cells. Acta Biomater. 2009 Nov 1;5(9):3453–3466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depan D, Shah JS, Misra RDK. Degradation mechanism and increased stability of chitosan-based hybrid scaffolds cross-linked with nanostructured carbon: Process–structure–functional property relationship. Polym Degrad Stab. 2013 Nov 1;98(11):2331–2339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu X, Cao R, Li Y, et al. Three-component antibacterial membrane of poly (butylene carbonate), poly (lactic acid) and chitosan prepared by electrospinning. Mater Technol. 2019 Jul 3;34(8):463–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depan D, Misra RDK. The interplay between nanostructured carbon-grafted chitosan scaffolds and protein adsorption on the cellular response of osteoblasts: structure–function property relationship. Acta Biomater. 2013 Apr 1;9(4):6084–6094.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depan D, Misra RDK. Processing–structure–functional property relationship in organic–inorganic nanostructured scaffolds for bone‐tissue engineering: the response of preosteoblasts. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2012 Nov;100(11):3080–3091.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Depan D, Pratheep Kumar A, Singh RP, et al. Stability of chitosan/montmorillonite nanohybrid towards enzymatic degradation on grafting with poly (lactic acid). Mater Sci Technol. 2014 May 1;30(5):587–592.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thein-Han WW, Misra RDK. Three-dimensional chitosan-nanohydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. JOM. 2009 Sep 1;61(9):41–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thein-Han WW, Misra RDK. Biomimetic chitosan–nanohydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2009 May 1;5(4):1182–1197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao Q, Nooeaid P, Roether JA, et al. Bioglass®-based scaffolds incorporating polycaprolactone and chitosan coatings for controlled vancomycin delivery. Ceram Int. 2013 Sep 1;39(7):7517–7522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao Q, Li W, Yu S, et al. Multifunctional chitosan/polyvinyl pyrrolidone/45S5 Bioglass® scaffolds for MC3T3-E1 cell stimulation and drug release. Mater Sci Eng C. 2015 Nov 1;56:473–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgskinson R, Currey JD. The effect of variation in the structure on Young’s modulus of cancellous bone: a comparison of human and non-human material. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1990 Jun;204(2):115–121.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li W, Garmendia N, de Larraya UP, Ding Y, Detsch R, Grünewald A, Roether JA, Schubert DW, Boccaccini AR. 45S5 bioactive glass-based scaffolds coated with cellulose nanowhiskers for bone tissue engineering. RSC Adv. 2014;4(99):56156–56164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokubo T, Takadama H. How useful is SBF in predicting in vivo bone bioactivity. Biomaterials. 2006 May 1;27(15):2907–2915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown LS, Darmoc M, Havener MB; Antibacterial effects of 45S5 bioactive glass against four clinically relevant bacterial species. In: Clineff TD. editors. In55 the annual meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society Orthovita, Inc. Malvern, PA. 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Chen QZ, Efthymiou A, Salih V, et al. Bioglass®‐derived glass–ceramic scaffolds: study of cell proliferation and scaffold degradation in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2008 Mar 15;84(4):1049–1060.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plewinski M, Schickle K, Lindner M, et al. The effect of crystallization of bioactive bioglass 45S5 on apatite formation and degradation. Dent Mater. 2013 Dec 1;29(12):1256–1264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baino F, Vitale‐Brovarone C. Three‐dimensional glass‐derived scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: current trends and forecasts for the future. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2011 Jun 15;97(4):514–535.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alsultani HO, Almohna SJ. Manufacturing and characterization bioglass for bio application. Advances in natural and applied sciences,2016;10(17):135–142.
   Google Scholar
• Bellucci D, Cannillo V, Sola A. Overview of the effects of thermal processing on bioactive glasses. Sci Sintering. 2010 Sep 1;42(3):307–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li W, Pastrama MI, Ding Y, Zheng K, Hellmich C, Boccaccini AR. Ultrasonic elasticity determination of 45S5 bioglass®-based scaffolds: Influence of polymer coating and crosslinking treatment. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014 Dec 1;40:85–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fereshteh Z, Nooeaid P, Fathi M, et al. Mechanical properties and drug release behavior of PCL/zein coated 45S5 bioactive glass scaffolds for bone tissue engineering application. Data Brief. 2015 Sep 1;4:524–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li W, Wang H, Ding Y, Scheithauer EC, Goudouri OM, Grünewald A, Detsch R, Agarwal S, Boccaccini AR. Antibacterial 45S5 bioglass®-based scaffolds reinforced with genipin cross-linked gelatin for bone tissue engineering. J Mat Chem B. 2015;3(16):3367–3378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muxika A, Etxabide A, Uranga J, et al. De La Caba K. chitosan as a bioactive polymer: processing, properties and applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2017 Dec;1(105):1358–1368.
   Google Scholar
• Hu S, Chang J, Liu M, et al. Study on the antibacterial effect of 45S5 bioglass®. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2009 Jan 1;20(1):281–286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Leppäranta O, Munukka E, et al. Antibacterial effects and dissolution behavior of six bioactive glasses. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010 May 1;93(2):475–483.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rundegren J, Sjödin T, Petersson L, et al. Delmopinol interactions with cell walls of gram‐negative and gram‐positive oral bacteria. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1995 Apr;10(2):102–109.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar