Cytotoxicity evaluation and crystallochemical analysis of a novel and commercially available bone substitute material

9Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Alloplastic biomaterials are an alternative for autologous transplants and xenografts in oral surgery and dental implantology. These non-immunogenic and resorbable materials are becoming the basis for complete and predictable guided bone regeneration in many cases. The chemical composition of a great majority of them is based on calcium phosphate salts. In vivo performance is often variable. Objectives: The objective was to evaluate the biological and chemical properties of an experimental bone substitute material. Material and Methods: The present research focuses on the cytotoxicity comparison and physiochemical characterization of two biomaterials: a novel chitosan/tricalcium phosphate/alginate composite (CH/TCP/Ag) and a commercially available synthetic bone graft made of HA (60%) and (3TCP (40%) (HA/TCP). The materials were evaluated according to PN-EN ISO 10993 Biological evaluation of medical devices i.e. cytotoxicity on mouse fibroblasts (L929) and, in addition, tests on human osteoblasts (hFOB1.19) and human osteosarcoma (MG-63) were conducted. The crystallochemical analysis was performed using the X-ray powder diffraction method. The Bruker-AXS D8 Advance diffractometer (Karlsruhe, Germany) was used to collect diffractograms. Results: The tested materials showed a close resemblance in chemical composition and a considerable differentiation in cytotoxic response. Conclusions: The novel composite demonstrated a high degree of cytocompatibility, which is promising in future clinical trials

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bojar, W., Ciach, T., Kucharska, M., Maurin, J., Gruber, B. M., Krzysztoń-Russjan, J., … Anuszewska, E. L. (2015). Cytotoxicity evaluation and crystallochemical analysis of a novel and commercially available bone substitute material. Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 24(3), 511–516. https://doi.org/10.17219/acem/22599

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free