pp 1–11 | Cite as

A Comparative Investigation on Bioactivity and Antibacterial Properties of Sol-Gel Derived 58S Bioactive Glass Substituted by Ag and Zn

  • Mohammad Sadegh Nabizadeh Shahrbabak
  • Fariborz Sharifianjazi
  • Daruosh Rahban
  • Ali SalimiEmail author
Original Paper


The bioactive glass systems of xAg2O-SiO2-P2O5-CaO and xZnO-SiO2-P2O5-CaO (x = 2 and 4% mol) were successfully synthesized through sol-gel method. The effect of silver and zinc contents on the in-vitro formation of hydroxyapatite (HA), cell viability, and antibacterial properties were studied. The HA formation and its microstructure were investigated through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD). The results showed that the rate of crystalline HA formation on SiO2-P2O5-CaO-xAg2O bioactive glass, in which x = 0 and 2, (B (58S) and BA2), was higher than other specimens. The evaluation methods of 3-(4,5 dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) illustrated that low silver (2% Ag2O) amount had a stimulating influence on both differentiation and proliferation promotion of cells (G292 osteoblastic). Furthermore, the antibacterial investigations showed that Ag bioglass samples had better antibacterial effect in comparison to Zn bioglass samples. Accordingly, the results revealed that specimen BA2 can be a good candidate for bone tissue application due to its significant bioactivity, antibacterial potential and optimal cell viability.


Sol-gel processes Biocompatibility Bioactivity Antibacterial Hydroxyapatite Bone tissue 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



All authors would like to acknowledge the support of Najafabad Branch of Islamic Azad University for this investigation.


  1. 1.
    Baino F, Novajra G, Miguez-Pacheco V, Boccaccini AR, Vitale-Brovarone C (2016) Bioactive glasses: special applications outside the skeletal system. J Non-Cryst Solids 432:15–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmadi Z, Moztarzadeh F (2017) Synthesizing and characterizing of gelatin-chitosan-bioactive glass (58s) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Silicon:1–10Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ji L, Qiao W, Huang K, Zhang Y, Wu H, Miao S, Liu H, Dong Y, Zhu A, Qiu D (2017) Synthesis of nanosized 58S bioactive glass particles by a three-dimensional ordered macroporous carbon template. Mater Sci Eng C 75:590–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olthof MG, Tryfonidou MA, Liu X, Pouran B, Meij BP, Dhert WJ, Yaszemski MJ, Lu L, Alblas J, Kempen DH (2018) Phosphate functional groups improve oligo [(polyethylene glycol) fumarate] Osteoconduction and BMP-2 Osteoinductive efficacy. Tissue Eng A 24(9–10):819–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rajkumar G, Dhivya V, Mahalaxmi S, Rajkumar K, Sathishkumar G, Karpagam R (2018) Influence of fluoride for enhancing bioactivity onto phosphate based glasses. J Non-Cryst Solids 493:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bouhazma S, Chajri S, Khaldi M, Sadiki M, Barkai H, Elabed S, Koraichi SI, El Bali B, Lachkar M Characterization in vitro studies and antibacterial properties on a sol-gel derived silver incorporated bioglass. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2017. vol 1. IOP Publishing, p 012022Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pourshahrestani S, Kadri NA, Zeimaran E, Gargiulo N, Samuel S, Naveen SV, Hasikin K, Kamarul T, Towler MR (2018) Comparative efficacy of hemorrhage control of a novel mesoporous bioactive glass versus two commercial hemostats. Biomed Mater 13(2):025020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Solgi S, Khakbiz M, Shahrezaee M, Zamanian A, Tahriri M, Keshtkari S, Raz M, Khoshroo K, Moghadas S, Rajabnejad A (2017) Synthesis, characterization and in vitro biological evaluation of sol-gel derived Sr-containing nano bioactive glass. Silicon 9(4):535–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    El-Rashidy AA, Roether JA, Harhaus L, Kneser U, Boccaccini AR (2017) Regenerating bone with bioactive glass scaffolds: a review of in vivo studies in bone defect models. Acta Biomater 62:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lepry WC, Smith S, Nazhat SN (2018) Effect of sodium on bioactive sol-gel-derived borate glasses. J Non-Cryst Solids 500:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ilkhechi NN, Ahmadi A, Kaleji BK (2015) Optical and structural properties of nanocrystalline anatase powders doped by Zr, Si and cu at high temperature. Opt Quant Electron 47(8):2423–2434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ylänen H (2017) Bioactive glasses: materials, properties and applications. Woodhead Publishing,Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Gestel N, Gabriels F, van Rietbergen B, Arts J, Hofmann S (2017) Mechanical properties of bioactive glasses. In: bioactive glasses (second edition). Elsevier, pp 87-102Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hong Z, Reis RL, Mano JF (2009) Preparation and in vitro characterization of novel bioactive glass ceramic nanoparticles. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A: An Official Journal of The Society for Biomaterials, The Japanese Society for Biomaterials, and The Australian Society for Biomaterials and the Korean Society for Biomaterials 88(2):304–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abdelghany A, ElBatal H, Okasha A, Ramadan R, Wassel A, Menazea A (2017) Compatibility and Bone Bonding Efficiency of Gamma Irradiated Hench’s Bioglass. Silicon:1–9Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rouhani AR, Esmaeil-Khanian AH, Davar F, Hasani S (2018) The effect of agarose content on the morphology, phase evolution, and magnetic properties of CoFe2O4 nanoparticles prepared by sol-gel autocombustion method. Int J Appl Ceram Technol 15(3):758–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    El-Rashidy AA, Waly G, Gad A, Hashem AA, Balasubramanian P, Kaya S, Boccaccini AR, Sami I (2018) Preparation and in vitro characterization of silver-doped bioactive glass nanoparticles fabricated using a sol-gel process and modified Stöber method. J Non-Cryst Solids 483:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gul H, Zahid S, Zahid S, Kaleem M, Khan AS, Shah AT (2018) Sol-gel derived fluoride-doped bioactive glass powders: structural and long-term fluoride release/pH analysis. J Non-Cryst Solids 498:216–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ilkhechi NN, Ghorbani M, Mozammel M, Khajeh M (2017) The optical, photo catalytic behavior and hydrophilic properties of silver and tin co doped TiO2 thin films using sol–gel method. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 28(4):3571–3580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ilkhechi NN, Ghobadi N, Yahyavi F (2017) Enhanced optical and hydrophilic properties of V and La co-doped ZnO thin films. Opt Quant Electron 49(1):39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sharifi Sedeh E, Mirdamadi S, Sharifianjazi F, Tahriri M (2015) Synthesis and evaluation of mechanical and biological properties of scaffold prepared from Ti and mg with different volume percent. Synthesis and Reactivity in Inorganic, Metal-Organic, and Nano-Metal Chemistry 45(7):1087–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li R, Clark A, Hench L (1991) An investigation of bioactive glass powders by sol-gel processing. J Appl Biomater 2(4):231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Souza Balbinot G, Collares FM, Visioli F, Soares PBF, Takimi AS, Samuel SMW, Leitune VCB (2018) Niobium addition to sol-gel derived bioactive glass powders and scaffolds: in vitro characterization and effect on pre-osteoblastic cell behavior. Dent MaterGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zheng K, Boccaccini AR (2017) Sol-gel processing of bioactive glass nanoparticles: a review. Adv Colloid Interf SciGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pomrink GJ, Zhong J, Tosun Z, Howell RL, Cao C (2017) Sodium containing sol-gel derived bioactive glasses and uses thereof including hemostasis. Google Patents,Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Omar SA, Castro Y, Ballarre J, Schreiner WH, Durán A, Ceré SM (2017) Magnesium alloys implants coated with 58S sol-gel bioactive glass to retard first stage corrosion. Corrosion 73(12):1448–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jazi FS, Parvin N, Tahriri M, Alizadeh M, Abedini S, Alizadeh M (2014) The relationship between the synthesis and morphology of SnO2-Ag2O nanocomposite. Synthesis and Reactivity in Inorganic, Metal-Organic, and Nano-Metal Chemistry 44(5):759–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jazi FS, Parvin N, Rabiei M, Tahriri M, Shabestari ZM, Azadmehr AR (2012) Effect of the synthesis route on the grain size and morphology of ZnO/ag nanocomposite. J Ceram Process Res 13(5):523–526Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Abedini S, Parvin N, Ashtari P, Jazi F (2013) Microstructure, strength and CO2 separation characteristics of α-alumina supported γ-alumina thin film membrane. Adv Appl Ceram 112(1):17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moghanian A, Firoozi S, Tahriri M (2017) Characterization, in vitro bioactivity and biological studies of sol-gel synthesized SrO substituted 58S bioactive glass. Ceram Int 43(17):14880–14890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Balamurugan A, Balossier G, Laurent-Maquin D, Pina S, Rebelo A, Faure J, Ferreira J (2008) An in vitro biological and anti-bacterial study on a sol–gel derived silver-incorporated bioglass system. Dent Mater 24(10):1343–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weng Y, Liu H, Ji S, Huang Q, Wu H, Li Z, Wu Z, Wang H, Tong L, Fu RK (2018) A promising orthopedic implant material with enhanced osteogenic and antibacterial activity: Al2O3-coated aluminum alloy. Appl Surf Sci 457:1025–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sharifianjazi F, Parvin N, Tahriri M (2017) Formation of apatite nano-needles on novel gel derived SiO2-P2O5-CaO-SrO-Ag2O bioactive glasses. Ceram Int 43(17):15214–15220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wu W, Zhao W, Wu Y, Zhou C, Li L, Liu Z, Dong J, Zhou K (2019) Antibacterial behaviors of Cu2O particles with controllable morphologies in acrylic coatings. Appl Surf Sci 465:279–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ghazal K, Shoaib S, Khan M, Khan S, Rauf MK, Khan N, Badshah A, Tahir MN, Ali I (2019) Synthesis, characterization, X-ray diffraction study, in-vitro cytotoxicity, antibacterial and antifungal activities of nickel (II) and copper (II) complexes with acyl thiourea ligand. J Mol Struct 1177:124–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu J, Rawlinson SC, Hill RG, Fortune F (2016) Fluoride incorporation in high phosphate containing bioactive glasses and in vitro osteogenic, angiogenic and antibacterial effects. Dent Mater 32(10):e221–e237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Delgadillo-Velasco L, Hernández-Montoya V, Cervantes FJ, Montes-Morán MA, Lira-Berlanga D (2017) Bone char with antibacterial properties for fluoride removal: preparation, characterization and water treatment. J Environ Manag 201:277–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sharifianjazi F, Parvin N, Tahriri M (2017) Synthesis and characteristics of sol-gel bioactive SiO2-P2O5-CaO-Ag2O glasses. J Non-Cryst Solids 476:108–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Eltohamy M, Kundu B, Moon J, Lee H-Y, Kim H-W (2018) Anti-bacterial zinc-doped calcium silicate cements: bone filler. Ceram Int 44(11):13031–13038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zeeshan R, Mutahir Z, Iqbal H, Ali M, Iqbal F, Ijaz K, Sharif F, Shah AT, Chaudhry AA, Yar M (2018) Hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose (HPMC) crosslinked chitosan (CH) based scaffolds containing bioactive glass (BG) and zinc oxide (ZnO) for alveolar bone repair. Carbohydr Polym 193:9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fernandes JS, Gentile P, Pires RA, Reis RL, Hatton PV (2017) Multifunctional bioactive glass and glass-ceramic biomaterials with antibacterial properties for repair and regeneration of bone tissue. Acta Biomater 59:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kung J-C, Chen Y-J, Chiang Y-C, Lee C-L, Yang-Wang Y-T, Hung C-C, Shih C-J (2018) Antibacterial activity of silver nanoparticle (AgNP) confined mesoporous structured bioactive powder against enterococcus faecalis infecting root canal systems. J Non-Cryst Solids 502:62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Vale AC, Carvalho AL, Barbosa AM, Torrado E, Mano JF, Alves NM (2018) Novel antibacterial and bioactive silicate glass nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Adv Eng Mater 20(5):1700855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ilkhechi NN, Akbarpour MR, Yavari R, Azar Z (2017) Sn 4+ and La 3+ co doped TiO2 nanoparticles and their optical, photocatalytic and antibacterial properties under visible light. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 28(22):16658–16664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Phetnin R, Rattanachan ST (2015) Preparation and antibacterial property on silver incorporated mesoporous bioactive glass microspheres. J Sol-Gel Sci Technol 75(2):279–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bejarano J, Detsch R, Boccaccini AR, Palza H (2017) PDLLA scaffolds with cu-and Zn-doped bioactive glasses having multifunctional properties for bone regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res A 105(3):746–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ilkhechi NN, Yavari R, Barakan S (2017) Evaluation and optimization of effective parameters on zinc sulfate flotation by the Taguchi method. Silicon 9(5):695–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    El-Kady AM, Ali AF (2012) Fabrication and characterization of ZnO modified bioactive glass nanoparticles. Ceram Int 38(2):1195–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Raz M, Moztarzadeh F, Kordestani SS (2018) Sol-gel based fabrication and properties of mg-Zn doped bioactive glass/gelatin composite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Silicon 10(2):667–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rivadeneira J, Gorustovich A (2017) Bioactive glasses as delivery systems for antimicrobial agents. J Appl Microbiol 122(6):1424–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Akram M, Hussain R (2017) Antibacterial properties of bioactive glasses. Clinical Applications of Biomaterials. Springer, In, pp 357–382Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Guo W, Zhao F, Wang Y, Tang J, Chen X (2017) Characterization of the mechanical behaviors and bioactivity of tetrapod ZnO whiskers reinforced bioactive glass/gelatin composite scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 68:8–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Moghanian A, Firoozi S, Tahriri M, Sedghi A (2018) A comparative study on the in vitro formation of hydroxyapatite, cytotoxicity and antibacterial activity of 58S bioactive glass substituted by Li and Sr. Mater Sci Eng C 91:349–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Moghanian A, Firoozi S, Tahriri M (2017) Synthesis and in vitro studies of sol-gel derived lithium substituted 58S bioactive glass. Ceram Int 43(15):12835–12843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sepulveda P, Jones J, Hench L (2002) In vitro dissolution of melt-derived 45S5 and sol-gel derived 58S bioactive glasses. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: An Official Journal of The Society for Biomaterials, The Japanese Society for Biomaterials, and The Australian Society for Biomaterials and the Korean Society for Biomaterials 61(2):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Groh D, Döhler F, Brauer DS (2014) Bioactive glasses with improved processing. Part 1. Thermal properties, ion release and apatite formation. Acta Biomater 10(10):4465–4473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rabiee SM, Nazparvar N, Azizian M, Vashaee D, Tayebi L (2015) Effect of ion substitution on properties of bioactive glasses: a review. Ceram Int 41(6):7241–7251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Luo SH, Xiao W, Wei XJ, Jia WT, Zhang CQ, Huang WH, Jin DX, Rahaman MN, Day DE (2010) In vitro evaluation of cytotoxicity of silver-containing borate bioactive glass. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 95(2):441–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lu M, Liao J, Dong J, Wu J, Qiu H, Zhou X, Li J, Jiang D, He T-C, Quan Z (2016) An effective treatment of experimental osteomyelitis using the antimicrobial titanium/silver-containing nHP66 (nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66) nanoscaffold biomaterials. Sci Rep 6:39174CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Sadegh Nabizadeh Shahrbabak
    • 1
  • Fariborz Sharifianjazi
    • 2
  • Daruosh Rahban
    • 3
  • Ali Salimi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Nanobiotechnology Research CenterBaqiyatallah University of Medical scienceTehranIran
  2. 2.Young Researchers and Elite Club, Najafabad BranchIslamic Azad UniversityNajafabadIran
  3. 3.Department of Nanomedicine, School of Advanced Medical TechnologiesTehran University of Medical ScienceTehranIran

Personalised recommendations