Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32099357›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of nanomedicine2020

In vitro and in vivo Biological Responses to Graphene and Graphene Oxide: A Murine Calvarial Animal Study.

Ting-Kuo Chang, Yung-Chang Lu, Shu-Ting Yeh, Tzu-Chiao Lin, Chun-Hsiung Huang, Chang-Hung Huang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of nanomedicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. PCL/Graphene Scaffolds for the Osteogenesis Process.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Graphene-Based Scaffolds for Regenerative Medicine.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ting-Kuo Chang *Department of Medicine, MacKay Medical College, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Yung-Chang Lu *Department of Medicine, MacKay Medical College, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Shu-Ting YehDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tzu-Chiao LinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chun-Hsiung HuangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chang-Hung HuangDepartment of Medicine, MacKay Medical College, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Mackay Memorial Hospital · TWChanghua Christian Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGraphene and its derivatives have recently gained popularity in the biomedical field. Previous studies have confirmed that both the mechanical strength and wear resistance of graphene-containing polyethylene have been greatly improved. Therefore, it is being considered as an alternative for artificial joint replacement liners. Based on the literature, the wear debris generated from the traditional polymers used for orthopedic liners could lead to particle-induced osteolysis and, consequently, failure of joint replacement. However, the biological response of this novel graphene-based polymer is still unclear. Therefore, the current study aimed to investigate the in vitro and in vivo biological effects of graphene and graphene oxide (GO) particles on bone. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe biological responses of graphene and GO particles were tested via in vitro and murine calvarial in vivo models. In the in vitro model, murine macrophage cells were mixed with particles and hydrogel and printed into two differently designed scaffolds; the induced proinflammatory cytokines were then tested. In the murine in vivo model, the particle size distribution was measured via SEM, and these particles were then administrated in the calvarial area, referring to our established model. A micro-CT and histological analysis were performed to examine the biological effects of the particles on bone health. The data were analyzed via the one-way analysis of variance to determine the differences between the groups.

resultsBoth graphene and GO induced significantly higher TNF-α and IL-6 secretion compared with the control in the three-dimensional in vitro model. In the murine calvarial in vivo test, the graphene and GO particles increased the bone mass compared with the sham groups in the micro-CT analysis. Bone formation was also observed in the histological analysis.

conclusionIn these in vivo and in vitro studies, the graphene and GO wear debris did not seem to induce harmful biological response effect to bone. Bone formation around the skull was observed in the calvarial model instead. Graphene-containing biomaterials could be a suitable new material for application in orthopedic prostheses due to their benefit of eliminating the risk of particle-induce osteolysis.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsFemaleGraphiteInterleukin-6MacrophagesMiceMice, Inbred C57BLNanoparticlesOsteogenesisOsteolysisParticle SizeRAW 264.7 CellsSkullTissue ScaffoldsTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaBiocompatible Materialsgraphene oxideGraphiteInterleukin-6interleukin-6, mouseTumor Necrosis Factor-alphabiological responsegraphenegraphene oxideosteogenesisosteolysis

Identifiers

PMID32099357
PMCPMC6996553
OpenAlexW3004116960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.