Electrically Charged Hydroxyapatite Enhances Immobilization and Proliferation of Osteoblasts

Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 20)


Hydroxyapatite (HAP) is in use to fabricate implants in dentistry and orthopaedy. To functionalise a surface of the HAP that has a direct contact to the human cells a surface electrical charge deposition is employed. The current technologies can not provide uniformity of the charge for contrarily situated surfaces.

To overcome such the disadvantage a HAP hydrogenation technology has been reached. As the result the surface charge has been engineered.

The charge was estimated owing to measurements of the photoelectron emission work function. The later was increased to ∼ 0.2 eV.

The negatively charged HAP surface in contrast with the uncharged one attached 10 times more osteoblatic cells and increased their proliferation capacity in 1.6 time


implant hydroxyapatite electrical charge immobilisation proliferation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ratner B., Hoffman A., Schoen F., et al. (1996) Biomaterial science. London.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ito S., Shinomiya K., Nakamura S., Kobayyashi T., Nakamura M./ Yamashita K. (2006) Effect of electrical polarization of hydroxyapatite ceramics on new bone formation. Journal of the Japanese Bio-Electrical Research Society, 20: 23–27Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aronov D., Molotskii M., Rosenman G. (2207) Charge-induced wettability modification. Applied Phys. Let. 90: 104104-1–104104-1Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karlov A., Khlusov I., Dekhtyar Yu., Polyaka N. Influence of hydrogenated calciumphosphate surface on potential on stromal stem cells in situ. The Abstracts of the present Conference.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bystrov V., Bystrova N., Dekhtyar Yu/., Filippov S., Karlov A., Katashev A., Meissner C., Paramonova E., Patmalnieks A., Polyaka N., Sapronova A. (2006) Size depended electrical properties of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles IFMBE proc. 14.:3149–3150Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Geguzin Ya. E. Diffusion zone. (1979). Moscow (In Russian).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Akmene R.J., Balodis A.J., Dekhtyar Yu.D., Markelova G.N., Matvejevs J.V., Rozenfelds L.B., Sagaloviąs G.L., Smirnovs J.S., Tolkaąovs A.A., Upminš A.I. (1993) Exoelectron emission specrometre complete set of surface local investigation. Poverhnost, Fizika, Himija, Mehanika (Russian Journal), 8:125.–128.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lumbikanonda, N, & Sammons, R.L. (2001) Bone cell Attachment to Dental Implants of Different Surface characteristics. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants. 16: 627–636.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Biomedical Engineering and NanotechnologiesRiga Technical UniversityRigaLatvia
  2. 2.School of Dentistry, St Chad’s QueenswayUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations