Physicochemical characterization and biological effect of 3D-nanofibrous alumina scaffolds produced by solution blow spinning
Source abstract
Abstract
The objective of this study was to conduct a physicochemical characterization and in vivo assessment of the bioactivity of amorphous 3D-nanofibrous alumina scaffolds, manufactured using the Solution Blow Spinning (SBS) technique, for the purpose of bone regeneration. The nanofibers utilized in this research were derived from a solution containing aluminum nitrate, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), ethanol, and distilled water, and were subsequently spun using SBS. The resulting scaffolds underwent calcination at 500 °C. Physicochemical analysis of the scaffolds was carried out, and their biological effects were evaluated in the femurs of Wistar rats. The scaffolds exhibited an amorphous structure consisting of nanofibers with an average diameter of 290 nm. They presented a cotton-wool-like 3D configuration after calcination process. Histomorphometric analysis revealed a significantly higher degree of bone neoformation within the alumina groups compared to the control group during both experimental periods (p < 0.05). Additionally, the percentage of remaining alumina graft particles was consistent at 14 and 28 days. In conclusion, the assessed 3D nanofibrous alumina scaffolds facilitated bone deposition and supported the filling of bone defects with new bone tissue.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Hannouche D, Zaoui A, Zadegan F, Sedel L, Nizard R (2011) Thirty years of experience with alumina-on-alumina bearings in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1187-110.1007/s00264-010-1187-1 ↗
2. Schierano G et al (2015) An alumina toughened zirconia composite for dental implant application: In vivo animal results. Biomed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/15736010.1155/2015/157360 ↗
3. Piconi C, Porporati AA (2016) Bioinert ceramics: Zirconia and alumina. Handbook of Bioceramics and Biocomposites. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12460-5_410.1007/978-3-319-12460-5_4 ↗
4. Karlsson M, Pålsgård E, Wilshaw PR, Di Silvio L (2003) Initial in vitro interaction of osteoblasts with nano-porous alumina. Biomaterials 24(18):3039–3046. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00146-710.1016/S0142-9612(03)00146-7 ↗
5. Song Y, Ju Y, Song G, Morita Y (2013) In vitro proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells on nanoporous alumina. Int J Nanomedicine. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S4488510.2147/IJN.S44885 ↗
6. Toloue EB, Karbasi S, Salehi H, Rafienia M (2019) Potential of an electrospun composite scaffold of poly (3-hydroxybutyrate)-chitosan/alumina nanowires in bone tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.02.06210.1016/j.msec.2019.02.062 ↗
7. Gao C et al (2014) Current progress in bioactive ceramic scaffolds for bone repair and regeneration. Int J Mol Sci 15(3):4714–4732. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms1503471410.3390/ijms15034714 ↗
8. Popat KC et al (2005) Influence of nanoporous alumina membranes on long-term osteoblast response. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.11.02610.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.11.026 ↗
9. Naji A, Harmand MF (1991) Cytocompatibility of two coating materials, amorphous alumina and silicon carbide, using human differentiated cell cultures. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(91)90118-T10.1016/0142-9612(91)90118-T ↗
10. Leary Swan EE, Popat KC, Desai TA (2005) Peptide-immobilized nanoporous alumina membranes for enhanced osteoblast adhesion. Biomaterials 26(14):1969–1976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.07.00110.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.07.001 ↗
11. Webster TJ, Siegel RW, Bizios R (1999) Osteoblast adhesion on nanophase ceramics. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00020-410.1016/S0142-9612(99)00020-4 ↗
12. Mussano F, Genova T, Serra FG, Carossa M, Munaron L, Carossa S (2018) Nano-pore size of alumina affects osteoblastic response. Int J Mol Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms1902052810.3390/ijms19020528 ↗
13. Song Y, Ju Y, Morita Y, Song G (2013) Effect of the nanostructure of porous alumina on growth behavior of MG63 osteoblast-like cells. J Biosci Bioeng 116(4):509–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2013.04.00710.1016/j.jbiosc.2013.04.007 ↗
14. Popat KC, Chalvanichkul KI, Barnes GL, Latempa TJ, Grimes CA, Desai TA (2007) Osteogenic differentiation of marrow stromal cells cultured on nanoporous alumina surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res - Part A. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.3102810.1002/jbm.a.31028 ↗
15. Dewle A, Pathak N, Rakshasmare P, Srivastava A (Feb.2020) Multifarious Fabrication Approaches of Producing Aligned Collagen Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 6(2):779–797. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b0122510.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b01225 ↗
16. Lin W, Chen M, Qu T, Li J, Man Y (2020) Three-dimensional electrospun nanofibrous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.3447910.1002/jbm.b.34479 ↗
17. Chen Y, Dong X, Shafiq M, Myles G, Radacsi N, Mo X (2022) Recent Advancements on Three-Dimensional Electrospun Nanofiber Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering. Adv Fiber Mater. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42765-022-00170-710.1007/s42765-022-00170-7 ↗
18. Medeiros ES, Glenn GM, Klamczynski AP, Orts WJ, Mattoso LHC (2009) Solution blow spinning: A new method to produce micro- and nanofibers from polymer solutions. J Appl Polym Sci. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.3027510.1002/app.30275 ↗
19. Costa DL, Leite RS, Neves GA, de Santana LNL, Medeiros ES, Menezes RR (2016) Synthesis of TiO2 and ZnO nano and submicrometric fibers by solution blow spinning,” Mater Lett, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.07.07310.1016/j.matlet.2016.07.073 ↗
20. Santos AMC, Mota MF, Leite RS, Neves GA, Medeiros ES, Menezes RR (2018) Solution blow spun titania nanofibers from solutions of high inorganic/organic precursor ratio. Ceram Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.10.09610.1016/j.ceramint.2017.10.096 ↗
21. Farias RMDC, Menezes RR, Oliveira JE, De Medeiros ES (2015) Production of submicrometric fibers of mullite by solution blow spinning (SBS). Mater Lett. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2015.02.11110.1016/j.matlet.2015.02.111 ↗
22. Medeiros ELG et al (2021) 3D nanofibrous bioactive glass scaffolds produced by one-step spinning process. Ceram Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.08.11210.1016/j.ceramint.2020.08.112 ↗
23. da Costa Farias RM et al. (2018) Solution blow spun spinel ferrite and highly porous silica nanofibers, Ceram Int, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.03.09910.1016/j.ceramint.2018.03.099 ↗
24. Batista JD, Zanetta-Barbosa D, Cardoso SV, Dechichi P, Rocha FS, Pagnoncelli RM (2014) Effect of low-level laser therapy on repair of the bone compromised by radiotherapy. Lasers Med Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-014-1602-810.1007/s10103-014-1602-8 ↗
25. Wang J, Yu X (2010) Preparation, characterization and in vitro analysis of novel structured nanofibrous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 6(8):3004–3012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.01.04510.1016/j.actbio.2010.01.045 ↗
26. Mahapatra A, Mishra BG, Hota G (2013) Studies on electrospun alumina nanofibers for the removal of chromium(vi) and fluoride toxic ions from an aqueous system. Ind Eng Chem Res. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie301586j10.1021/ie301586j ↗
27. Kim JH et al (2014) Characterization and application of electrospun alumina nanofibers. Nanoscale Res Lett 9(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1556-276X-9-4410.1186/1556-276X-9-44 ↗
28. Panda PK, Ramakrishna S (2007) Electrospinning of alumina nanofibers using different precursors. J Mater Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-1581-210.1007/s10853-007-1581-2 ↗
29. Medeiros ELG et al (2016) Porous Bioactive Nanofibers via Cryogenic Solution Blow Spinning and Their Formation into 3D Macroporous Scaffolds. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b0007210.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00072 ↗
30. Davoodi E, Zhianmanesh M, Montazerian H, Milani AS, Hoorfar M (2020) Nano-porous anodic alumina: fundamentals and applications in tissue engineering. J Mater Sci Mater Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-020-06398-210.1007/s10856-020-06398-2 ↗
31. Walpole AR, Briggs EP, Karlsson M, Pålsgård E, Wilshaw PR (2003) Nano-porous Alumina Coatings for Improved Bone Implant Interfaces. Materialwiss Werkstofftech. https://doi.org/10.1002/mawe.20030070710.1002/mawe.200300707 ↗
32. Masters KS, Anseth KS (2004) CELL-MATERIAL INTERACTIONS. Adv Chem Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2377(03)29002-510.1016/S0065-2377(03)29002-5 ↗
33. Hing KA (2005) Bioceramic bone graft substitutes: Influence of porosity and chemistry. Int J Appl Ceram Technol. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7402.2005.02020.x10.1111/j.1744-7402.2005.02020.x ↗
34. Li L, Kang W, Zhuang X, Shi J, Zhao Y, Cheng B (2015) A comparative study of alumina fibers prepared by electro-blown spinning (EBS) and solution blowing spinning (SBS). Mater Lett. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2015.08.01610.1016/j.matlet.2015.08.016 ↗
35. Li L, Kang W, Zhao Y, Li Y, Shi J, Cheng B (2015) Preparation of flexible ultra-fine Al2O3 fiber mats via the solution blowing method. Ceram Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.08.08510.1016/j.ceramint.2014.08.085 ↗
36. Alizadeh A et al (2019) Culture of dental pulp stem cells on nanoporous alumina substrates modified by carbon nanotubes. Int J Nanomedicine. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S18973010.2147/IJN.S189730 ↗
37. Deligianni DD, Katsala N, Ladas S, Sotiropoulou D, Amedee J, Missirlis YF (2001) Effect of surface roughness of the titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V on human bone marrow cell response and on protein adsorption. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00274-X10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00274-X ↗
38. Youn HS, Jyoti MA, Kwak KA, Seo HS, Lee BT, Song HY (2011) Enhanced osteoconduction and angiogenesis of a three dimensional continuously porous Al2O3 implant. Mater Sci Eng C. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2011.05.01610.1016/j.msec.2011.05.016 ↗
39. Pedimonte BJ et al (2014) Morphological zeta-potential variation of nanoporous anodic alumina layers and cell adherence. Acta Biomater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.09.02310.1016/j.actbio.2013.09.023 ↗
40. Vandrovcová M, Bačáková L (2011) Adhesion, growth and differentiation of osteoblasts on surface-modified materials developed for bone implants, Physiol Res https://doi.org/10.33549/physiolres.93204510.33549/physiolres.932045 ↗
41. Aramesh M, Cervenka J (2014) Surface modification of porous anodic alumina for medical and biological applications. Nanomedicine 438:439–467. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278683237_Surface_Modification_of_Porous_Anodic_Alumina_for_Medical_and_Biological_Application
42. Wenzel RN (1949) Surface roughness and contact angle. J Phys Colloid Chem. https://doi.org/10.1021/j150474a01510.1021/j150474a015 ↗
43. Webster TJ, Siegel RW, Bizios R (1999) Design and evaluation of nanophase alumina for orthopaedic/dental applications. Nanostructured Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-9773(99)00283-410.1016/S0965-9773(99)00283-4 ↗
44. Minakov AV, Pryazhnikov MI, Simunin MM, Dobrosmyslov SS, Kuular AA, Molokeev MS, Volochaev MN, Khartov SV, Voronin AS (2022) Rheological properties of colloidal suspensions of alumina nanofibers. J Mol Liq. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2022.12038510.1016/j.molliq.2022.120385 ↗
45. Serrano-Lotina A, Portela R, Baeza P, Alcolea-Rodriguez V, Villarroel M, Avila P (2023) Zeta potential as a tool for functional materials development. Catal Today. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2022.08.00410.1016/j.cattod.2022.08.004 ↗
46. Kosmulski M (2011) The pH-dependent surface charging and points of zero charge: V. Update J Colloid Interface Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2010.08.02310.1016/j.jcis.2010.08.023 ↗
47. James RO, Parks GA (1982) Characterization of aqueous colloids by their electrical double-layer and intrinsic surface chemical properties. Surf Coll Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3204-6_210.1007/978-1-4613-3204-6_2 ↗
48. Tan F, Liu J, Song K, Liu M, Wang J (2018) Effect of surface charge on osteoblastic proliferation and differentiation on a poly(ethylene glycol)-diacrylate hydrogel. J Mater Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-1558-810.1007/s10853-017-1558-8 ↗
49. Tan F, Liu J, Liu M, Wang J (2017) Charge density is more important than charge polarity in enhancing osteoblast-like cell attachment on poly(ethylene glycol)-diacrylate hydrogel. Mater Sci Eng C. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.03.05110.1016/j.msec.2017.03.051 ↗
50. Dames JE, Causton B, Bovell Y, Davy K, Sturt CS (1986) The migration of osteoblasts over substrata of discrete surface charge. Biomaterials. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(86)90109-210.1016/0142-9612(86)90109-2 ↗
51. Price RL, Gutwein LG, Kaledin L, Tepper F, Webster TJ (2003) Osteoblast function on nanophase alumina materials: Influence of chemistry, phase, and topography. J Biomed Mater Res - Part A 67(4):1284–1293. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.2001110.1002/jbm.a.20011 ↗
52. Tran N, Webster TJ (2009) Nanotechnology for bone materials. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomedicine Nanobiotechnology 1(3):336–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/wnan.2310.1002/wnan.23 ↗
53. Ni S, Li C, Ni S, Chen T, Webster TJ (2014) Understanding improved osteoblast behavior on select nanoporous anodic alumina. Int J Nanomedicine 9(1):3325–3334. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S6034610.2147/IJN.S60346 ↗
54. Liu X, Lim JY, Donahue HJ, Dhurjati R, Mastro AM, Vogler EA (2007) Influence of substratum surface chemistry/energy and topography on the human fetal osteoblastic cell line hFOB 1.19: Phenotypic and genotypic responses observed in vitro, Biomaterials, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.06.01610.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.06.016 ↗
55. Anselme K, Ponche A, Bigerelle M (2010) Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on cell response to bone implant materials Part 2 Biological aspects. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 224(12):1487–1507. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544119JEIM90110.1243/09544119JEIM901 ↗