On the Bioactivity and Mechanical Properties of Gehlenite Nanobioceramic: A Comparative Study.

Bioactivity gehlenite hydroxyapatite mechanical properties

Journal

Journal of medical signals and sensors
ISSN: 2228-7477
Titre abrégé: J Med Signals Sens
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101577416

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Historique:
received: 19 08 2019
revised: 12 10 2019
accepted: 30 01 2020
entrez: 18 7 2020
pubmed: 18 7 2020
medline: 18 7 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

For a new biomaterial which is going to be applied in bone tissue regeneration, bioactivity (bone bonding ability) and desirable mechanical properties are very essential parameters to take into consideration. In the present study, the gehlenite's mechanical properties and bioactivity are assessed and compared with hydroxyapatite (HA) for bone tissue regeneration. Gehlenite and HA nanoparticles are synthesized through sol-gel method and coprecipitation technique, respectively, and their physical and chemical properties are characterized through X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and transmission electron microscopy. The results prove that the gehlenite and HA phases without any undesirable phase are obtained, and the particles of both compounds are in the nanometer range with spherical morphology. The compressive strength of both compounds are assessed, and the values for gehlenite and HA disks are 144 ± 5 and 150 ± 4.8 MPa, respectively. Next, their bioactivity potential is assessed into simulated body fluid (SBF) up to 21 days, and the results show that after 14 days, gehlenite disk's surface is completely covered with newly formed Ca-P particles. However, some sporadic precipitations after 21 days soaking into SBF are formed onto the HA disk's surface. This comparative study shows that nanostructured gehlenite disk with desirable mechanical properties and faster bioactivity kinetic than HA can be considered as a promising bioceramic for bone tissue regeneration.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
For a new biomaterial which is going to be applied in bone tissue regeneration, bioactivity (bone bonding ability) and desirable mechanical properties are very essential parameters to take into consideration. In the present study, the gehlenite's mechanical properties and bioactivity are assessed and compared with hydroxyapatite (HA) for bone tissue regeneration.
METHOD METHODS
Gehlenite and HA nanoparticles are synthesized through sol-gel method and coprecipitation technique, respectively, and their physical and chemical properties are characterized through X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and transmission electron microscopy.
RESULTS RESULTS
The results prove that the gehlenite and HA phases without any undesirable phase are obtained, and the particles of both compounds are in the nanometer range with spherical morphology. The compressive strength of both compounds are assessed, and the values for gehlenite and HA disks are 144 ± 5 and 150 ± 4.8 MPa, respectively. Next, their bioactivity potential is assessed into simulated body fluid (SBF) up to 21 days, and the results show that after 14 days, gehlenite disk's surface is completely covered with newly formed Ca-P particles. However, some sporadic precipitations after 21 days soaking into SBF are formed onto the HA disk's surface.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
This comparative study shows that nanostructured gehlenite disk with desirable mechanical properties and faster bioactivity kinetic than HA can be considered as a promising bioceramic for bone tissue regeneration.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32676446
doi: 10.4103/jmss.JMSS_41_19
pii: JMSS-10-105
pmc: PMC7359955
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

105-112

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Medical Signals & Sensors.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

There are no conflicts of interest.

Références

Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017 Feb 1;71:1253-1266
pubmed: 27987682
Biomaterials. 2013 Dec;34(38):10028-42
pubmed: 24095251
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2016 Nov 1;68:774-779
pubmed: 27524079
Biomaterials. 2006 May;27(15):2907-15
pubmed: 16448693
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019 Jun;99:83-95
pubmed: 30889758
Materials (Basel). 2017 Feb 10;10(2):
pubmed: 28772513
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019 Dec;105:110084
pubmed: 31546418
Biomaterials. 2010 Apr;31(12):3175-84
pubmed: 20117832
Biomed Mater. 2016 Jun 15;11(3):035018
pubmed: 27305523
Calcif Tissue Int. 1994 Nov;55(5):381-6
pubmed: 7866920
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019 Mar;96:765-775
pubmed: 30606589

Auteurs

Ashkan Bigham (A)

Department of Materials Engineering, Advanced Materials Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

Saeed Kermani (S)

Department of Bioelectrics and Biomedical Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Medical Image and Signal Processing Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Ahmad Saudi (A)

Student Research Committee, School of Advanced Medical Technologies in Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Amir Hamed Aghajanian (AH)

Department of Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

Mohammad Rafienia (M)

Biosensor Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Classifications MeSH