ArticleActa biomaterialia2019
Fabrication of a nanoparticle-containing 3D porous bone scaffold with proangiogenic and antibacterial properties.
Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomimetic Strategies for Bone Regeneration: Smart Scaffolds and Multiscale Cues.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Types of Bone Substitutes and Their Application in Regenerative Medicine: A Systematic Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Osteogenic-Inducing Apatite/Agarose/Gelatin Hybrid Scaffolds Embedding Gold Nanoparticles.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Integrating Micro- and Nanostructured Platforms and Biological Drugs to Enhance Biomaterial-Based Bone Regeneration Strategies.Biomacromolecules · 2025Review
- Synthesis of Chitosan and Ferric-Ion (FeBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Enhanced bone regeneration by osteoinductive and angiogenic zein/whitlockite composite scaffolds loaded with levofloxacin.RSC advances · 2024Article
- Biological Properties and Medical Applications of Carbonate Apatite: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
- Highly oriented hydrogels for tissue regeneration: design strategies, cellular mechanisms, and biomedical applications.Theranostics · 2024Review
- Antimicrobial and Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds for Orthopedic Infections.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2023Review
- Histomorphometric evaluation of 3D printed graphene oxide-enriched poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds for bone regeneration.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Research Progress of Design Drugs and Composite Biomaterials in Bone Tissue Engineering.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Review
- Bioceramic-based scaffolds with antibacterial function for bone tissue engineering: A review.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Scaffolds in the microbial resistant era: Fabrication, materials, properties and tissue engineering applications.Materials today. Bio · 2022Review
- Medical Applications of Porous Biomaterials: Features of Porosity and Tissue-Specific Implications for Biocompatibility.Advanced healthcare materials · 2022Review
- Inorganic Nanoparticles in Bone Healing Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Periosteum and development of the tissue-engineered periosteum for guided bone regeneration.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2022Review
- The Role of Transmission Electron Microscopy in the Early Development of Mesoporous Materials for Tissue Regeneration and Drug Delivery Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Design of 3D Scaffolds for Hard Tissue Engineering: From Apatites to Silicon Mesoporous Materials.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
- Antibiotics- and Heavy Metals-Based Titanium Alloy Surface Modifications for Local Prosthetic Joint Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Natural medicine delivery from biomedical devices to treat bone disorders: A review.Acta biomaterialia · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
3D porous scaffolds based on agarose and nanocrystalline apatite, two structural components that act as a temporary mineralized extracellular matrix, were prepared by the GELPOR3D method. This shaping technology allows the introduction of thermally-labile molecules within the scaffolds during the fabrication procedure. An angiogenic protein, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor, and an antibiotic, cephalexin, loaded in mesoporous silica nanoparticles, were included to design multifunctional scaffolds for bone reconstruction. The dual release of both molecules showed a marked increase in the number of blood vessels on embryonic day 14 in chicken embryos grown ex ovo, while, at the same time providing an antibiotic local concentration capable of inhibiting Staphylococcus aureus bacterial growth. In this sense, different release patterns, monitored by UV-spectroscopy, could be tailored as a function of the cephalexin loading strategy, either releasing all the loaded cephalexin in the first 4 h or less than 50% after 24 h. The scaffold surface was characterized by a high hydrophilicity, with contact angles between 50° and 63°, which enabled the adhesion and proliferation of preosteoblastic cells. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: The localized delivery of bioactive molecules has attracted significant attention due to the potential for dose reduction as well as reduced side effects compared to systemic delivery. In this article multifunctional 3D porous scaffolds with a designed porosity have been fabricated. The method also enables the controlled loading of an antibiotic drug and an angiogenic protein into the scaffold. These scaffolds, whose composition resembles the extracellular matrix are suitable for the adhesion of preosteoblast cells, exhibit a sustained cephalexin delivery adequate for inhibiting bacterial growth as well as release the proangiogenic molecule which induces blood vessel formation in chicken embryos grown ex ovo.
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.