Role of organic and ceramic biomaterials on bone healing and regeneration: An experimental study with significant value in translational tissue engineering and regenerative medicine
Moshiri A., Tekyieh Maroof N., Mohammad Sharifi A.
Animal Study, published in Iran J Basic Med Sci (2020) — 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
- Animal Study
- Journal
- Iran J Basic Med Sci (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33235700
- PMCID
- PMC7671416
- DOI
- 10.22038/ijbms.2020.46228.10707
- Citations
- 2
Abstract (original English)
Objectives We investigated the role of various biomaterials on cell viability and in healing of an experimentally induced femoral bone hole model in rats. Materials and methods Cell viability and cytotoxicity of gelatin (Gel; 50 µg/µl), chitosan (Chi; 20 µg/µl), hydroxyapatite (HA; 50 µg/µl), nanohydroxyapatite (nHA; 10 µg/µl), three-calcium phosphate (TCP; 50 µg/µl) and strontium carbonate (Sr; 10 µg/µl) were evaluated on hADSCs via MTT assay. In vivo femoral drill-bone hole model was produced in rats that were either left untreated or treated with autograft, Gel, Chi, HA, nHA, TCP and Sr, respectively. The animals were euthanized after 30 days. Their bone holes were evaluated by gross-pathology, histopathology, SEM and radiography. Also, their dry matter, bone ash and mineral density were measured. Results Both the Gel and Chi showed cytotoxicity, while nHA had no role on cytotoxicity and cell-viability. All the HA, TCP and Sr significantly improved cell viability when compared to controls ( P 0.05). Both the Gel and Chi had no role on osteoconduction and osteoinduction. Compared to HA, nHA showed superior role in increasing new bone formation, mineral density and ash ( P 0.05). In contrast to HA and nHA, both the TCP and Sr showed superior morphological, radiographical and biochemical properties on bone healing ( P 0.05). TCP and Sr showed the most effective osteoconduction
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.