ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2015
In-situ hybridization of calcium silicate and hydroxyapatite-gelatin nanocomposites enhances physical property and in vitro osteogenesis.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial Peptide-Loaded Pectolite Nanorods for Enhancing Wound-Healing and Biocidal Activity of Titanium.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2021Article
- Dopaminergic enhancement of cellular adhesion in bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs).Journal of stem cell research & therapy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Low mechanical strengths and inadequate bioactive material-tissue interactions of current synthetic materials limit their clinical applications in bone regeneration. Here, we demonstrate gelatin modified siloxane-calcium silicate (GEMOSIL-CS), a nanocomposite made of gelatinous hydroxyapatite with in situ pozzolanic formation of calcium silicate (CS) interacting among gelatin, silica and Calcium Hydroxide (Ca(OH)2). It is shown the formation of CS matrices, which chemically bonds to the gelatinous hydroxyapatite, provided hygroscopic reinforcement mechanism and promoted both in vitro and in vivo osteogenic properties of GEMOSIL-CS. The formation of CS was identified by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and powder X-ray diffraction. The interfacial bindings within nanocomposites were studied by FTIR and thermogravimetric analysis. Both gelatin and CS have been found critical to the structure integrity and mechanical strengths (93 MPa in compressive strength and 58.9 MPa in biaxial strength). The GEMOSIL-CS was biocompatible and osteoconductive as result of type I collagen secretion and mineralized nodule formation from MC3T3 osteoblasts. SEM and TEM indicated the secretion of collagen fibers and mineral particles as the evidence of mineralization in the early stage of osteogenic differentiation. In vivo bone formation capability was performed by implanting GEMOSIL-CS into rat calvarial defects for 12 weeks and the result showed comparable new bone formation between GEMOSIL-CS group (20%) and the control (20.19%). The major advantage of GEMOSIL-CS composites is in situ self-hardening in ambient or aqueous environment at room temperature providing a simple, fast and cheap method to produce porous scaffolds.
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.