Bioactivity and Mechanical Stability of 45S5 Bioactive Glass Scaffolds Based on Natural Marine Sponges
Bioactive glass (BG) based scaffolds (45S5 BG composition) were developed by the replica technique using natural marine sponges as sacrificial templates. The resulting scaffolds were characterized by superior mechanical properties (compression strength up to 4 MPa) compared to conventional BG scaffolds prepared using polyurethane (PU) packaging foam as a template. This result was ascribed to a reduction of the total scaffold porosity without affecting the pore interconnectivity (>99%). It was demonstrated that the reduction of total porosity did not affect the bioactivity of the BG-based scaffolds, tested by immersion of scaffolds in simulated body fluid (SBF). After 1 day of immersion in SBF, a homogeneous CaP deposit on the surface of the scaffolds was formed, which evolved over time into carbonate hydroxyapatite (HCA). Moreover, the enhanced mechanical properties of these scaffolds were constant over time in SBF; after an initial reduction of the maximum compressive strength upon 7 days of immersion in SBF (to 1.2 ± 0.2 MPa), the strength values remained almost constant and higher than those of BG-based scaffolds prepared using PU foam (<0.05 MPa). Preliminary cell culture tests with Saos-2 osteoblast cell line, namely direct and indirect tests, demonstrated that no toxic residues remained from the natural marine sponge templates and that cells were able to proliferate on the scaffold surfaces.
KeywordsNatural marine sponges Bioactive glass scaffolds Simulated body fluid Biocompatibility Osteoblasts
- 6.Boccardi, E., V. Melli, G. Catignoli, L. Altomare, M. T. Jahromi, M. Cerruti, L.-P. Lefebvre, and L. De Nardo. Study of the mechanical stability and bioactivity of Bioglass® based glass-ceramic scaffolds produced via powder metallurgy-inspired approach. Biomed. Mater. 11:015005, 2016.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Cunningham, E., N. Dunne, S. Clarke, S. Y. Choi, G. Walker, R. Wilcox, R. E. Unger, F. Buchnan, and C. J. Kirkpatrick. Comparative characterization of 3-D hydroxyapatite scaffolds developed via replication of synthetic polymer foams and natural marine sponges. J. Tissue Sci. Eng. S1:001, 2011. doi:10.4172/2157-7552.S1-001.Google Scholar
- 15.Hench, L. L. Opening paper 2015-some comments on Bioglass: four eras of discovery and development. Biomed. Glas. 1:1–11, 2015.Google Scholar
- 20.Liu, W., T. Wang, Y. Shen, H. Pan, S. Peng, and W. W Lu. Strontium incorporated coralline hydroxyapatite for engineering bone. ISRN Biomater, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2013/649163.
- 21.Macon, A. L. B., T. B. Kim, E. M. Valliant, K. Goetschius, R. K. Brow, D. E. Day, A. Hoppe, A. R. Boccaccini, I. Y. Kim, C. Ohtsuki, T. Kokubo, A. Osaka, M. Vallet-Regí, D. Arcos, L. Fraile, A. J. Salinas, A. V. Teixeira, Y. Vueva, R. M. Almeida, M. Miola, C. Vitale-Brovarone, E. Verné, W. Höland, and J. R. Jones. A unified in vitro evaluation for apatite-forming ability of bioactive glasses and their variants. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 26:115, 2015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Philippart, A., A. R. Boccaccini, C. Fleck, D. W. Schubert, and J. A. Roether. Toughening and functionalization of bioactive ceramic and glass bone scaffolds by biopolymer coatings and infiltration: a review of the last 5 years. Expert Rev. Med. Devices. 12(1):93–111, 2015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.Vitale-Brovarone, C., E. Verné, L. Robiglio, P. Appendino, F. Bassi, G. Martinasso, G. Muzio, and R. Canuto. Development of glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: characterisation, proliferation of human osteoblasts and nodule formation. Acta Biomater. 3(2):198–208, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Xynos, I. D., M. V. J. Hukkanen, J. J. Batten, L. D. Buttery, L. L. Hench, and J. M. Polak. Bioglass® 45S5 stimulates osteoblast turnover and enhances bone formation in vitro: implications and applications for bone tissue engineering. Calcif. Tissue Int. 67(4):321–329, 2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar