Chitosan-alginate biocomposite containing fucoidan for bone tissue engineering
Venkatesan J., Bhatnagar I., Kim SK.
Laboratory Study, published in Mar Drugs (2014) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Mar Drugs (2014)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 24441614
- PMCID
- PMC3917275
- DOI
- 10.3390/md12010300
- Citations
- 140
Abstract (original English)
Over the last few years, significant research has been conducted in the construction of artificial bone scaffolds. In the present study, different types of polymer scaffolds, such as chitosan-alginate (Chi-Alg) and chitosan-alginate with fucoidan (Chi-Alg-fucoidan), were developed by a freeze-drying method, and each was characterized as a bone graft substitute. The porosity, water uptake and retention ability of the prepared scaffolds showed similar efficacy. The pore size of the Chi-Alg and Chi-Alg-fucoidan scaffolds were measured from scanning electron microscopy and found to be 62-490 and 56-437 µm, respectively. In vitro studies using the MG-63 cell line revealed profound cytocompatibility, increased cell proliferation and enhanced alkaline phosphatase secretion in the Chi-Alg-fucoidan scaffold compared to the Chi-Alg scaffold. Further, protein adsorption and mineralization were about two times greater in the Chi-Alg-fucoidan scaffold than the Chi-Alg scaffold. Hence, we suggest that Chi-Alg-fucoidan will be a promising biomaterial for bone tissue regeneration.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.