Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Charge injection based electrical stimulation on polypyrrole planar electrodes to regulate cellular osteogenic differentiation

Liu Z., Dong L., Cheng K., Luo Z., Weng W.

Laboratory Study, published in RSC Adv (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
RSC Adv (2018)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35541122
PMCID
PMC9080618
DOI
10.1039/c8ra02601g
Citations
9

Abstract (original English)

In this study, polypyrrole (Ppy) electrodes were prepared to support an electrical stimulation to MC3T3-E1 cells for regulating their osteogenic differentiation. The charge injection capacity ( C Q ) of the Ppy electrodes could be adjusted by the Ppy thickness, and a higher C Q could make the electrode able to produce a higher charge injection quantity ( Q inj ) at applied voltage. The Q inj onto electrode could be considered as the intensity of the stimulation pulse to cells, and the pulse frequency means the number of electric stimulation with Q inj at one second. Hence, we conducted the present work in the view of Q inj . When the cells were electrically stimulated for 1 hour per day, the electrodes with Q inj ranged in 0.08-0.15 μQ had an obvious role in enhancing cellular osteogenic differentiation whereas Q inj of lower than 0.03 μQ or more than 0.30 μQ gave the stimulations with no or negative effects. And the stimulation with 1 or 25 Hz showed to enhance the differentiation, whereas the stimulation with 50 Hz gave an inhibiting effect. We further found the osteogenic differentiation potential triggered by electrical simulation was related to cell growth stage, and the stimulation carried out at early stage (day 2-5) during 8 days cell culture showed more contribution to enhancing osteogenic differentiation than that at later stage (day 6-8). It is proposed that the desi

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.