Crystalline cellulose-based bioactive glass constructs: synthesis, characterization and evaluation for bone tissue engineering applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.
Source: Not provided · Quality: missing
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Facial Trauma and Fracture Management · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (95)
Show source-provided references
1. Aguiar H, Serra J, González P, León B (2009) Structural study of sol-gel silicate glasses by IR and Raman spectroscopies. J Non Cryst Solids 355:475–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2009.01.01010.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2009.01.010 ↗
2. Ahmed MZ, Mutahir S, Intisar A et al (2023) Probe sonicated cotton cellulose fibers treated with bone conditioned medium for optimum cell growth and mineralization. Cellulose 30(12):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-023-05386-310.1007/s10570-023-05386-3 ↗
3. Al MMZ, Islam MD, Mobarak MH (2023) The development of eco-friendly biopolymers for use in tissue engineering and drug delivery. J Nanomater 2023:9270064
4. Azubuike CP, Rodríguez H, Okhamafe AO, Rogers RD (2012) Physicochemical properties of maize cob cellulose powders reconstituted from ionic liquid solution. Cellulose 19:425–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10570-011-9631-Y/TABLES/210.1007/S10570-011-9631-Y/TABLES/2 ↗
5. Baino F, Ferraris M, Bretcanu O et al (2013) Optimization of composition, structure and mechanical strength of bioactive 3-D glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone substitution. J Biomater Appl 27:872–890. https://doi.org/10.1177/088532821142919310.1177/0885328211429193 ↗
6. Bansal P, Hall M, Realff MJ et al (2010) Multivariate statistical analysis of X-ray data from cellulose: a new method to determine degree of crystallinity and predict hydrolysis rates. Bioresour Technol 101:4461–4471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.01.06810.1016/j.biortech.2010.01.068 ↗
7. Bartos A, Anggono J, Farkas ÁE et al (2020) Alkali treatment of lignocellulosic fibers extracted from sugarcane bagasse: composition, structure, properties. Polym Test 88:106549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.10654910.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106549 ↗
8. Benov L (2021) Improved formazan dissolution for bacterial MTT assay. Microbiol Spectr 9:e01637-e1721. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.01637-2110.1128/spectrum.01637-21 ↗
9. Bertsch P, Diba M, Mooney DJ, Leeuwenburgh SCG (2023) Self-healing injectable hydrogels for tissue regeneration. Chem Rev 123:834–87310.1021/acs.chemrev.2c00179 ↗
10. Cheng W, Zhu Y, Jiang G et al (2023) Sustainable cellulose and its derivatives for promising biomedical applications. Prog Mater Sci 138:10115210.1016/j.pmatsci.2023.101152 ↗
11. Ciolacu D, Ciolacu F, Popa VI (2011) Amorphous cellulose - structure and characterization. Cellul Chem Technol 45:13–21
12. Dec P, Modrzejewski A, Pawlik A (2022) Existing and novel biomaterials for bone tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci 24(1):52910.3390/ijms24010529 ↗
13. Distler T, Fournier N, Grünewald A, Polley C, Seitz H, Detsch R, Boccaccini AR (2020) Polymer-bioactive glass composite filaments for 3d scaffold manufacturing by fused deposition modeling: fabrication and characterization. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8(2020):552. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.0055210.3389/fbioe.2020.00552 ↗
14. Dutta RC, Dey M, Dutta AK, Basu B (2017) Competent processing techniques for scaffolds in tissue engineering. Biotechnol Adv 35:240–25010.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.01.001 ↗
15. Egamberdiev EA, Norboyev SK (2022) Extraction of cellulose nanocrystals from secondary paper waste and their use in paper production. Tech Sci Innov 2022(3):215–222. https://doi.org/10.51346/tstu-01.22.3-77-019510.51346/tstu-01.22.3-77-0195 ↗
16. Ege D, Zheng K, Boccaccini AR (2022) Borate bioactive glasses (BBG): bone regeneration, wound healing applications, and future directions. ACS Appl Bio Mater 5:3608–362210.1021/acsabm.2c00384 ↗
17. Esmaeili Ranjbar F, Mohandesnezhad S, Mirzaei-Parsa MJ et al (2024) Exploring the Zein/58S bioactive glass nanocomposite for enhanced bone tissue engineering: a comprehensive investigation of structural, chemical, biological, and osteogenic properties through in vitro and in vivo studies. J Polym Environ 33:462–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-024-03432-010.1007/s10924-024-03432-0 ↗
18. Fazeli N, Arefian E, Irani S et al (2021) 3D-printed PCL scaffolds coated with nanobioceramics enhance osteogenic differentiation of stem cells. ACS Omega 6:35284–35296. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c0401510.1021/acsomega.1c04015 ↗
19. Filippi M, Born G, Chaaban M, Scherberich A (2020) Natural polymeric scaffolds in bone regeneration. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8:53279110.3389/fbioe.2020.00474 ↗
20. Fraile-martínez O, García-montero C, Coca A et al (2021) Applications of polymeric composites in bone tissue engineering and jawbone regeneration. Polymers (Basel) 13:342910.3390/polym13193429 ↗
21. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10570-013-0030-4/FIGURES/510.1007/S10570-013-0030-4/FIGURES/5 ↗
22. French AD (2017) Glucose, not cellobiose, is the repeating unit of cellulose and why that is important. Cellulose 24:4605–4609. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10570-017-1450-3/FIGURES/310.1007/S10570-017-1450-3/FIGURES/3 ↗
23. Fu C, Bai H, Hu Q et al (2017a) Enhanced proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts on graphene oxide-impregnated PLGA-gelatin nanocomposite fibrous membranes. RSC Adv 7:8886–8897. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ra26020a10.1039/c6ra26020a ↗
24. Fu C, Yang X, Tan S, Song L (2017b) Enhancing cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 Pre-osteoblasts by BMP-2 delivery in graphene oxide-incorporated PLGA/HA biodegradable microcarriers. Sci Rep 7:12549. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12935-x10.1038/s41598-017-12935-x ↗
25. Gao C, Peng S, Feng P, Shuai C (2017) Bone biomaterials and interactions with stem cells. Bone Res 5:1705910.1038/boneres.2017.59 ↗
26. Girón J, Kerstner E, Medeiros T, Oliveira L, Machado GM, Malfatti CF, Pranke P (2021) Biomaterials for bone regeneration: an orthopedic and dentistry overview. Braz J Med Biol Res 54:e11055. https://doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X2021E1105510.1590/1414-431X2021E11055 ↗
27. Gong J, Li J, Xu J et al (2017) Research on cellulose nanocrystals produced from cellulose sources with various polymorphs. RSC Adv 7:33486–33493. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA06222B10.1039/C7RA06222B ↗
28. Gupta P, Adhikary M, Kumar M, Bhardwaj N, Mandal BB (2016) Biomimetic, osteoconductive non-mulberry silk fiber reinforced tricomposite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(45):30797–30810. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b1136610.1021/acsami.6b11366 ↗
29. Han F, Wang J, Ding L et al (2020) Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: achievements, future, and sustainability in Asia. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8:8310.3389/fbioe.2020.00083 ↗
30. Harun NH, Froemming GRA, Mohd Ismail A et al (2022) Osteoblast demineralization induced by oxidized high-density lipoprotein via the inflammatory pathway is suppressed by adiponectin. Int J Mol Sci 23:14616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23231461610.3390/ijms232314616 ↗
31. Heise K, Kontturi E, Allahverdiyeva Y et al (2021) Nanocellulose: recent fundamental advances and emerging biological and biomimicking applications. Adv Mater 33:200434910.1002/adma.202004349 ↗
32. Ilyas K, Zahid S, Batool M et al (2019) In-vitro investigation of graphene oxide reinforced bioactive glass ceramics composites. J Non-Cryst Solids 505:122–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2018.10.04710.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2018.10.047 ↗
33. Janmohammadi M, Nazemi Z, Salehi AOM et al (2023) Cellulose-based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and localized drug delivery. Bioact Mater 20:137–163
34. Jia W, Lau GY, Huang W et al (2015) Bioactive glass for large bone repair. Adv Healthc Mater 4:2842–2848. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.20150044710.1002/adhm.201500447 ↗
35. Jones JR (2013) Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids. Acta Biomater 9:4457–448610.1016/j.actbio.2012.08.023 ↗
36. Kajander K, Sirkiä SV, Vallittu PK et al (2023) Bioactive glasses promote rapid pre-osteoblastic cell migration in contrast to hydroxyapatite, while carbonated apatite shows migration inhibiting properties. Sci Rep 13:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-47883-210.1038/s41598-023-47883-2 ↗
37. Kang KS, Lee SJ, Lee H et al (2011) Effects of combined mechanical stimulation on the proliferation and differentiation of pre-osteoblasts. Exp Mol Med 43:367–373. https://doi.org/10.3858/emm.2011.43.6.04010.3858/emm.2011.43.6.040 ↗
38. Kaou MH, Furkó M, Balázsi K, Balázsi C (2023) Advanced bioactive glasses: the newest achievements and breakthroughs in the area. Nanomaterials 13:228710.3390/nano13162287 ↗
39. Khojasteh A, Fahimipour F, Eslaminejad MB et al (2016) Development of PLGA-coated β-TCP scaffolds containing VEGF for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol 69:780–788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.07.01110.1016/j.msec.2016.07.011 ↗
40. Koons GL, Diba M, Mikos AG (2020) Materials design for bone-tissue engineering. Nat Rev Mater 5:584–60310.1038/s41578-020-0204-2 ↗
41. Kravanja KA, Finšgar M (2022) A review of techniques for the application of bioactive coatings on metal-based implants to achieve controlled release of active ingredients. Mater des 217:11065310.1016/j.matdes.2022.110653 ↗
42. Kuo ZK, Lai PL, Toh EKW et al (2016) Osteogenic differentiation of preosteoblasts on a hemostatic gelatin sponge. Sci Rep 6:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep3288410.1038/srep32884 ↗
43. Li L, Lu P, Liu Y et al (2023) Three-dimensional-bioprinted bioactive glass/cellulose composite scaffolds with porous structure towards bone tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel) 15:2226. https://doi.org/10.3390/POLYM1509222610.3390/POLYM15092226 ↗
44. Liang Y, Mitriashkin A, Lim TT, Goh JCH (2021) Conductive polypyrrole-encapsulated silk fibroin fibers for cardiac tissue engineering. Biomaterials 276:121008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2021.12100810.1016/j.biomaterials.2021.121008 ↗
45. Liu X, Rahaman MN, Hilmas GE, Bal BS (2013) Mechanical properties of bioactive glass (13–93) scaffolds fabricated by robotic deposition for structural bone repair. Acta Biomater 9:7025–7034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.02.02610.1016/j.actbio.2013.02.026 ↗
46. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2-ΔΔCT method. Methods 25:402–408. https://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.126210.1006/meth.2001.1262 ↗
47. Ma J, Chen CZ, Wang DG et al (2010) In vitro degradability and bioactivity of mesoporous CaO–MgO–P 2O5–SiO2 glasses synthesized by sol-gel method. J Sol-Gel Sci Technol 54:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-010-2159-z10.1007/s10971-010-2159-z ↗
48. Madadi A, Wei J (2022) Characterization of calcium silicate hydrate gels with different calcium to silica ratios and polymer modifications. Gels 8:75. https://doi.org/10.3390/GELS802007510.3390/GELS8020075 ↗
49. Maharjan B, Kaliannagounder VK, Jang SR et al (2020) In-situ polymerized polypyrrole nanoparticles immobilized poly(ε-caprolactone) electrospun conductive scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 114:111056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.11105610.1016/j.msec.2020.111056 ↗
50. Man X, Yang L, Liu S et al (2019) Arbutin promotes MC3T3-E1 mouse osteoblast precursor cell proliferation and differentiation via the Wnt/ß-catenin signaling pathway. Mol Med Rep 19:4637–4644. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2019.1012510.3892/mmr.2019.10125 ↗
51. Martelli A, Bellucci D, Cannillo V (2023) Additive manufacturing of polymer/bioactive glass scaffolds for regenerative medicine: a review. Polymers (Basel) 15:247310.3390/polym15112473 ↗
52. Melikoğlu AY, Bilek SE, Cesur S (2019) Optimum alkaline treatment parameters for the extraction of cellulose and production of cellulose nanocrystals from apple pomace. Carbohydr Polym 215:330–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.03.10310.1016/j.carbpol.2019.03.103 ↗
53. Mosmann T (1983) Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Methods 65:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1759(83)90303-410.1016/0022-1759(83)90303-4 ↗
54. Murphy C, Kolan K, Li W et al (2017) 3D bioprinting of stem cells and polymer/bioactive glass composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Int J Bioprint 3:53–63. https://doi.org/10.18063/IJB.2017.01.00510.18063/IJB.2017.01.005 ↗
55. Nam S, French AD, Condon BD, Concha M (2016) Segal crystallinity index revisited by the simulation of X-ray diffraction patterns of cotton cellulose Iβ and cellulose II. Carbohydr Polym 135:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CARBPOL.2015.08.03510.1016/J.CARBPOL.2015.08.035 ↗
56. Ni ZJ, Li X, Zhang YN, Lou BY, Pan S, Lv Y, Liu DL (2017) Micro-cellulose preparation method based on urea/naoh dissolved system. Univ Politeh Buchar Sci Bull Ser C Elect Eng Compu Sci 79:45–54
57. Ovsianikov A, Khademhosseini A, Mironov V (2018) The synergy of scaffold-based and scaffold-free tissue engineering strategies. Trends Biotechnol 36:348–35710.1016/j.tibtech.2018.01.005 ↗
58. Owen Rh, Dard, Larjava, H. GMH (2018) Hydoxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate biphasic ceramics as regenerative material for the repair of complex bone defects. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 106(6):2493–251210.1002/jbm.b.34049 ↗
59. Pajares-Chamorro N, Chatzistavrou X (2020) Bioactive glass nanoparticles for tissue regeneration. ACS Omega 5:12716–12726. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c0018010.1021/acsomega.0c00180 ↗
60. Patil TV, Patel DK, Dutta SD et al (2022) Nanocellulose, a versatile platform: from the delivery of active molecules to tissue engineering applications. Bioact Mater 9:566–589
61. Poh PSP, Hutmacher DW, Holzapfel BM et al (2016) In vitro and in vivo bone formation potential of surface calcium phosphate-coated polycaprolactone and polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite scaffolds. Acta Biomater 30:319–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.01210.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.012 ↗
62. Qu H, Fu H, Han Z, Sun Y (2019) Biomaterials for bone tissue engineering scaffolds: a review. RSC Adv 9:26252–2626210.1039/C9RA05214C ↗
63. Rahaman MN, Day DE, Sonny Bal B et al (2011) Bioactive glass in tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 7:2355–237310.1016/j.actbio.2011.03.016 ↗
64. Ranjbar FE, Foroutan F, Hajian M et al (2021) Preparation and characterization of 58S bioactive glass based scaffold with Kaempferol-containing Zein coating for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 109:1259–1270. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.3478610.1002/jbm.b.34786 ↗
65. Ranjbar FE, Farzad-Mohajeri S, Samani S et al (2023) Kaempferol-loaded bioactive glass-based scaffold for bone tissue engineering: in vitro and in vivo evaluation. Sci Rep 13:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39505-810.1038/s41598-023-39505-8 ↗
66. Riss TL (2013) Is Your MTT Assay the Right Choice? In: Promega Corporation. https://worldwide.promega.com/resources/pubhub/is-your-mtt-assay-really-the-best-choice/. Accessed 19 Jan 2025
67. Román-Doval R, Tellez-Cruz MM, Rojas-Chávez H et al (2019) Enhancing electrospun scaffolds of PVP with polypyrrole/iodine for tissue engineering of skin regeneration by coating via a plasma process. J Mater Sci 54:3342–3353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-018-3024-710.1007/s10853-018-3024-7 ↗
68. Ruiz-Aguilar C, Alcántara-Quintana LE, Aguilar-Reyes EA, Olivares-Pinto U (2022) Fabrication, characterization, and in vitro evaluation of β-TCP/ZrO2-phosphate-based bioactive glass scaffolds for bone repair. Bol Soc Esp Ceram Vidrio 61:191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsecv.2020.09.00410.1016/j.bsecv.2020.09.004 ↗
69. Salètes M, Vartin M, Mocquot C et al (2021) Mesoporous bioactive glasses cytocompatibility assessment: a review of in vitro studies. Biomimetics 6:1–3210.3390/biomimetics6010009 ↗
70. Samadian H, Mobasheri H, Azami M, Faridi-Majidi R (2020) Osteoconductive and electroactive carbon nanofibers/hydroxyapatite nanocomposite tailored for bone tissue engineering: in vitro and in vivo studies. Sci Rep 10:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71455-310.1038/s41598-020-71455-3 ↗
71. Scherrer P (1912) Bestimmung der inneren Struktur und der Größe von Kolloidteilchen mittels Röntgenstrahlen. In: Kolloidchemie Ein Lehrbuch. Chemische Technologie in Einzeldarstellungen. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-33915-2_710.1007/978-3-662-33915-2_7 ↗
72. Segal L, Creely JJ, Martin AE, Conrad CM (1959) An empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using the x-ray diffractometer. Text Res J 29:786–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/00405175590290100310.1177/004051755902901003 ↗
73. Semicheva A, Ersoy U, Vasilaki A, Myrtziou I, Kanakis I (2024) Defining the most potent osteoinductive culture conditions for MC3T3-E1 cells reveals no implication of oxidative stress or energy metabolism. Int J Mol Sci 25(8):4180. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms2508418010.3390/ijms25084180 ↗
74. Shah AT, Batool M, Chaudhry AA et al (2016) Effect of calcium hydroxide on mechanical strength and biological properties of bioactive glass. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 61:617–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.03.03010.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.03.030 ↗
75. Sharma S, Sudhakara P, Singh J et al (2021) Critical review of biodegradable and bioactive polymer composites for bone tissue engineering and drug delivery applications. Polymers (Basel) 13:262310.3390/polym13162623 ↗
76. Sharma RK, Bandichhor R, Mishra V et al (2023) Advanced metal oxide-based nanocatalysts for the oxidative synthesis of fine chemicals. Mater Adv 4:1795–183010.1039/D2MA00977C ↗
77. Sonatkar J, Kandasubramanian B (2021) Bioactive glass with biocompatible polymers for bone applications. Eur Polym J 160:11080110.1016/j.eurpolymj.2021.110801 ↗
78. Souza JRC, Torres JA, Ribeiro LS et al (2023) The facile microwave-assisted coprecipitation route to obtain polyoxoniobate (Na7(H3O)Nb6O19·14H2O) nanorods modified with copper for CO2 photoreduction. AppliedChem 3:320–333. https://doi.org/10.3390/appliedchem302002010.3390/appliedchem3020020 ↗
79. Sridhar V, Park H (2020) Extraction of microfibrillar cellulose from waste paper by naoh/urethane aqueous system and its utility in removal of lead from contaminated water. Materials 13:1–10. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1312285010.3390/ma13122850 ↗
80. Sun K, Fu R, Liu XW et al (2022) Osteogenesis and angiogenesis of a bulk metallic glass for biomedical implants. Bioact Mater 8:253–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.06.01810.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.06.018 ↗
81. Szwed-Georgiou A, Płociński P, Kupikowska-Stobba B et al (2023) Bioactive materials for bone regeneration: biomolecules and delivery systems. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 9:5222–525410.1021/acsbiomaterials.3c00609 ↗
82. Väisänen S, Kosonen H, Ristolainen M, Vuorinen T (2021) Cellulose dissolution in aqueous NaOH–ZnO: effect of pulp pretreatment at macro and molecular levels. Cellulose 28:4385–4396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-03779-w10.1007/s10570-021-03779-w ↗
83. Wang P, Zhao L, Liu J et al (2015) Bone tissue engineering via nanostructured calcium phosphate biomaterials and stem cells. Bone Res 2:1401710.1038/boneres.2014.17 ↗
84. Wang Y, Nguyen DT, Yang G et al (2021) A modified MTS proliferation assay for suspended cells to avoid the interference by hydralazine and β-mercaptoethanol. Assay Drug Dev Technol 19:184–190. https://doi.org/10.1089/adt.2020.102710.1089/adt.2020.1027 ↗
85. Wang M, Hu J, Dickey MD (2022a) Tough Ionogels: synthesis, toughening mechanisms, and mechanical properties-a perspective. JACS Au 2:2645–2657. https://doi.org/10.1021/JACSAU.2C00489/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/AU2C00489_0009.JPEG10.1021/JACSAU.2C00489/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/AU2C00489_0009.JPEG ↗
86. Wang X, He J, Pang S et al (2022b) High-efficiency and high-quality extraction of hemicellulose of bamboo by freeze-thaw assisted two-step alkali treatment. Int J Mol Sci 23:8612. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms2315861210.3390/ijms23158612 ↗
87. Wang X, Wang C, Chu C et al (2024) Structure-function integrated biodegradable Mg/polymer composites: design, manufacturing, properties, and biomedical applications. Bioact Mater 39:74–105
88. Wondraczek L, Bouchbinder E, Ehrlicher A et al (2022) Advancing the mechanical performance of glasses: perspectives and challenges. Adv Mater 34:210902910.1002/adma.202109029 ↗
89. Wu S, Shi S, Liu R et al (2023) The transformations of cellulose after concentrated sulfuric acid treatment and its impact on the enzymatic saccharification. Biotechnol Biofuels Bioprod 16:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13068-023-02293-410.1186/S13068-023-02293-4 ↗
90. Xu D, Fan L, Gao L et al (2016) Micro-nanostructured polyaniline assembled in cellulose matrix via interfacial polymerization for applications in nerve regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8:17090–17097. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b0355510.1021/acsami.6b03555 ↗
91. Zeeshan R, Mutahir Z, Iqbal H et al (2018) Hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose (HPMC) crosslinked chitosan (CH) based scaffolds containing bioactive glass (BG) and zinc oxide (ZnO) for alveolar bone repair. Carbohydr Polym 193:9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.03.04610.1016/j.carbpol.2018.03.046 ↗
92. Zhang S, Zhang F, Jin L et al (2019) Preparation of spherical nanocellulose from waste paper by aqueous NaOH/thiourea. Cellulose 26:5177–5185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02434-910.1007/s10570-019-02434-9 ↗
93. Zhang Y, Wu D, Zhao X et al (2020) Stem cell-friendly scaffold biomaterials: applications for bone tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8:59860710.3389/fbioe.2020.598607 ↗
94. Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Xu W et al (2023) Preparation methods of cellulose nanocrystal and its application in treatment of environmental pollution: a mini-review. Coll Interface Sci Commun 53:10070710.1016/j.colcom.2023.100707 ↗
95. Zhou Y, Shi M, Jones JR et al (2017) Strategies to direct vascularisation using mesoporous bioactive glass-based biomaterials for bone regeneration. Int Mater Rev 62:392–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/09506608.2016.126674410.1080/09506608.2016.1266744 ↗