journal article·2023-10-20

Comparison of structural and antimicrobial activity between graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide-reinforced hydroxyapatite-based nanocomposites for biomedical application

Md Ifat-Al-Karim, Md Al Mamun, Farzana Nahid, Mohammad Ismail, Sheikh Manjura Hoque, Md Mahbubul Haque

Bulletin of Materials Science· Volume 46· Issue 4
Publisher page

Abstract

Hydroxyapatite (HAP) has been widely used in medical applications for the repair or replacement of bone tissues in the body. The constituents and structure of HAP are similar to those of bones and teeth. HAP shows comparatively inferior mechanical properties compared to natural bone. One of the best candidate materials for the reinforcing phase of HAP is graphene oxide (GO) and reduced graphene oxide (RGO), which exhibit excellent biocompatibility. Graphene oxide–hydroxyapatite (GO-HAP) and reduced graphene oxide–hydroxyapatite (RGO-HAP) bio-composites were fabricated with the objective of improving the morphological and structural properties of the biomaterial and future biomedical uses. The X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis revealed the formation of GO-HAP and RGO-HAP nanocomposites, and the diffraction pattern of GO-HAP and RGO-HAP was analogous to the standard pattern of HAP. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy confirmed the presence of functional groups in HAP, GO, RGO, GO-HAP and RGO-HAP. The flower-like morphology of the synthesized composites was investigated by field emission scanning electron microscopy. The relative quality of the nanocomposites is investigated by Raman spectroscopy and ultraviolet spectroscopy analyses. Energy-dispersive X-ray analysis provided the information that the Ca/P ratios of HAP, GO-HAP and RGO-HAP were 1.56, 1.60 and 1.59, which were close to the ratio of standard HAP, which is 1.67. The stability of the composites with respect to the temperature has been explored by thermogravimetric analysis. By performing an antibacterial investigation, the antimicrobial properties of GO-HAP and RGO-HAP against Bacillus subtilis and Staphylococcus aureus were observed. The cell viability of GO-HAP and RGO-HAP composites was analysed by performing an MTT assay against Vero cell lines. GO-HAP and RGO-HAP nanocomposites could be excellent alternatives in the area of biomedical applications.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (49)

Show source-provided references
1. Li J, Chen Y, Yin Y, Yao F and Yao K 2007 Biomaterials 28 78110.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.09.042 ↗
2. Maji K, Dasgupta S, Pramanik K and Bissoyi A 2018 Mater. Sci. Eng. C 86 8310.1016/j.msec.2018.02.001 ↗
3. Maji K, Dasguptaa S, Pramanik K and Bissoyi A 2015 J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 26 119010.1080/09205063.2015.1082809 ↗
4. Bose S, Banerjee A, Dasgupta S and Bandyopadhyay A 2007 J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 92 32310.1111/j.1551-2916.2008.02881.x ↗
5. Allen M J, Tung V C and Kaner R B 2009 Chem. Rev. 110 13210.1021/cr900070d ↗
6. Iliut M, Leordean C, Canpean V, Teodorescu C M and Astilean S 2013 J. Mater. Chem. C 1 409410.1039/c3tc30177j ↗
7. Iliut M, Gabudean A M, Leordean C, Simon T, Teodorescu C M and Astilean S 2013 Chem. Phys. Lett. 586 12710.1016/j.cplett.2013.09.032 ↗
8. An S J, Zhu Y, Lee S H, Stoller M D, Emilsson T, Park S et al 2010 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 1 125910.1021/jz100080c ↗
9. Hosseinpour A, Abdizadeh H and Golobostanfard M R 2015 Procedia Mater. Sci. 11 48010.1016/j.mspro.2015.11.065 ↗
10. Iskandar F, Hikmah U, Stavila E and Aimon A H 2017 RSC Adv. 7 5239110.1039/C7RA10013B ↗
11. Li H and Bubeck C 2013 Macromol. Res. 21 29010.1007/s13233-013-1139-x ↗
12. Zhan D, Ni Z, Chen W, Sun L, Luo Z, Lai L et al 2011 Carbon 49 136210.1016/j.carbon.2010.12.002 ↗
13. Aydin T, Gurcan C, Taheri H and Yilmazer A 2018 Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. Springer 1107 12910.1007/5584_2018_221 ↗
14. Bellet P, Gasparotto M, Pressi S, Fortunato A, Scapin G, Mba M et al 2021 Nanomaterials 11 40410.3390/nano11020404 ↗
15. Li M, Xiong P, Yan F, Li S, Ren C, Yin Z et al 2018 Bioact. Mater. 3 110.1016/j.bioactmat.2018.01.001 ↗
16. Hoque M E, Sakinah N, Chuan Y L and Ansari M N M 2014 Int. J. Sci. Eng. Technol. 3 458
17. Hidayah N M S, Liu W W, Lai C W, Noriman N Z, Khe C S, Hashim U et al 2017 AIP Conf. Proc. 1892 15000210.1063/1.5005764 ↗
18. Zhu R, Yu R, Yao J, Wang D and Ke J 2008 J. Alloys Compd. 457 55510.1016/j.jallcom.2007.03.081 ↗
19. Fu C, Zhao G, Zhang H and Li S 2013 Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 8 626910.1016/S1452-3981(23)14760-2 ↗
20. Neelgund G M, Oki A and Luo Z 2013 Mater. Res. Bull. 48 17510.1016/j.materresbull.2012.08.077 ↗
21. Lobo A O, Corat M A F, Ramos S C, Matsushima J T, Granato A E C, Pacheco-Soares C et al 2010 Langmuir 26 1830810.1021/la1034646 ↗
22. Raynaud S, Champion E, Bernache-Assollant D and Thomas P 2002 Biomaterials 23 4
23. Rey C, Combes C, Drouet C and Grossin D 2011 Comprehensive Biomater. 1 18710.1016/B978-0-08-055294-1.00178-1 ↗
24. Iacoboni I, Perrozzi F, Macera L, Taglieri G, Ottaviano L and Fioravanti G 2018 J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 107 202610.1002/jbm.a.36716 ↗
25. FitzGerald V, Martin R A, Jones J R, Qiu D, Wetherall K M, Moss R M et al 2008 J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 91A 7610.1002/jbm.a.32206 ↗
26. Zhang L, Liu W, Yue C, Zhang T, Li P, Xing Z et al 2013 Carbon 61 10510.1016/j.carbon.2013.04.074 ↗
27. Thakur A, Kumar S and Rangra V S 2015 AIP Conf. Proc. 1661 08003210.1063/1.4915423 ↗
28. Choi D and Prashant N K 2006 Am. Ceram. Soc. 89 44410.1111/j.1551-2916.2005.00738.x ↗
29. Nishikawa H 2001 Mater. Lett. 50 36410.1016/S0167-577X(01)00318-4 ↗
30. Sumathra M, Sadasivuni K K, Kumar S S and Rajan M 2018 ACS Omega 3 1462010.1021/acsomega.8b02090 ↗
31. Rodríguez-González C, Cid-Luna H E, Salas P and Castaño V M 2014 J. Nanomater. 2014 110.1155/2014/940903 ↗
32. Baradaran S, Moghaddam E, Basirun W J, Mehrali M, Sookhakian M, Hamdi M et al 2014 Carbon 69 3210.1016/j.carbon.2013.11.054 ↗
33. Murugan A V, Muraliganth T and Manthiram A 2009 Chem. Mater. 21 500410.1021/cm902413c ↗
34. Shahmohammadi M, Jahandideh R, Behnamghader A and Rangie M 2010 Int. J. Nano Dimens. 1 41
35. Malard L M, Pimenta M A, Dresselhaus G and Dresselhaus M S 2009 Phys. Rep. 473 5110.1016/j.physrep.2009.02.003 ↗
36. Dresselhaus M S, Jorio A, Hofmann M, Dresselhaus G and Saito R 2010 Nano Lett. 10 75110.1021/nl904286r ↗
37. Xue Y, Zhu L, Chen H, Qu J and Dai L 2015 Carbon 92 30510.1016/j.carbon.2015.04.046 ↗
38. Lee J H, Shin Y C, Jin O S and Kang S H 2015 Nanoscale 7 1164210.1039/C5NR01580D ↗
39. Shi Y Y, Li M, Liu Q, Jia Z J, Xu X C, Cheng Y et al 2016 J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 27 4810.1007/s10856-015-5634-9 ↗
40. Afzal M A F, Kalmodia S, Kesarwani P, Basu B and Balani K 2013 J. Biomater. Appl. 27 96710.1177/0885328211431856 ↗
41. Shahriary L and Athawale A A 2014 Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 2 58
42. Amedlous A, Amadine O, Essamlali Y, Daanoun K, Aadil M and Zahouily M 2019 RSC Adv. 9 1413210.1039/C9RA02021G ↗
43. Zhang Z, Chen H, Xing C, Guo M, Xu F, Wang X et al 2011 Nano Res. 4 59910.1007/s12274-011-0116-y ↗
44. Shen J, Shi M, Yan B, Ma H, Li N, Hu Y et al 2010 Colloids Surf. B: Biointerfaces 81 43410.1016/j.colsurfb.2010.07.035 ↗
45. Shen J F, Shi M, Ma H W, Yan B, Li N and Ye M X 2011 Mater. Res. Bull. 46 207710.1016/j.materresbull.2011.06.042 ↗
46. Tene T, Usca G T, Guevara M, Molina R, Veltri F, Arias M et al 2020 Nanomaterials 10 27910.3390/nano10020279 ↗
47. Rodríguez-González C, Salas P, López-Marín L M, Millán-Chiu B and Rosa E D L 2018 Mater. Res. Express 5 125023410.1088/2053-1591/aae29c ↗
48. Sasidharan A, Panchakarla L S, Sadanandan A R, Ashokan A, Chandran P, Girish C M et al 2012 Small 8 125110.1002/smll.201102393 ↗
49. Yang K, Li Y, Tan X, Peng R and Liu Z 2010 Small 9 149210.1002/smll.201201417 ↗