ArticleJournal of biomedical materials research. Part A2015
In vitro cytocompatibility of one-dimensional and two-dimensional nanostructure-reinforced biodegradable polymeric nanocomposites.
Article in Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biodegradable graphene nanocomposites as functional biomaterials: a review of their role in controlled drug delivery and tissue engineering.RSC advances · 2025Review
- Microenvironment Restruction of Emerging 2D Materials and their Roles in Therapeutic and Diagnostic Nano-Bio-Platforms.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Use of Nanocomposites in Bone Regeneration.Cureus · 2022Review
- Antipathogenic properties and applications of low-dimensional materials.Nature communications · 2021Review
- Surface-Induced in Situ Sonothermodynamically Controlled Functionalized Graphene Oxide for in Vitro Cytotoxicity and Antioxidant Evaluations.ACS omega · 2019Article
- In Vitro Bioactivity of One- and Two-Dimensional Nanoparticle-Incorporated Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds.Tissue engineering. Part A · 2018Article
- Boron nitride nanotubes and nanoplatelets as reinforcing agents of polymeric matrices for bone tissue engineering.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials · 2017Article
- Toxicology of graphene-based nanomaterials.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2016Review
- Porous three-dimensional carbon nanotube scaffolds for tissue engineering.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2015Article
- Engineering Functional Graphenic Materials for Bone Repair.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the in vitro cytocompatibility of one-dimensional and two-dimensional (1D and 2D) carbon and inorganic nanomaterial reinforced polymeric nanocomposites fabricated using biodegradable polymer poly (propylene fumarate), crosslinking agent N-vinyl pyrrolidone (NVP) and following nanomaterials: single and multiwalled carbon nanotubes, single and multiwalled graphene oxide nanoribbons, graphene oxide nanoplatelets, molybdenum disulfide nanoplatelets, or tungsten disulfide nanotubes dispersed between 0.02 and 0.2 wt% concentrations in the polymer. The extraction media of unreacted components, crosslinked nanocomposites and their degradation products were examined for effects on viability and attachment using two cell lines: NIH3T3 fibroblasts and MC3T3 preosteoblasts. The extraction media of unreacted PPF/NVP elicited acute dose-dependent cytotoxicity attributed to leaching of unreacted components into cell culture media. However, extraction media of crosslinked nanocomposites showed no dose dependent adverse effects. Further, all crosslinked nanocomposites showed high viability (78-100%), high cellular attachment (40-55%), and spreading that was confirmed by confocal and scanning electron microscopy. Degradation products of nanocomposites showed a mild dose-dependent cytotoxicity possibly due to acidic degradation components of PPF. In general, compared to PPF control, none of the nanocomposites showed significant differences in cellular response to unreacted components, crosslinked nanocomposites and their degradation products. Initial minor cytotoxic response and lower cell attachment numbers were observed only for a few nanocomposite groups; these effects were absent at later time points for all PPF nanocomposites. The favorable cytocompatibility results for all the nanocomposites opens avenues for in vivo safety and efficacy studies for bone tissue engineering applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.