Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes

Sogand Schäfer; Hayder Al-Qaddo; Martin Gosau; Ralf Smeets; Philip Hartjen; Reinhard E Friedrich; Ola A Nada; Tobias Vollkommer; Ashkan Rashad

doi:10.21873/invivo.12472

Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes

Standard

Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes. / Schäfer, Sogand; Al-Qaddo, Hayder; Gosau, Martin ; Smeets, Ralf ; Hartjen, Philip ; Friedrich, Reinhard E; Nada, Ola A; Vollkommer, Tobias; Rashad, Ashkan.

In: IN VIVO, Vol. 35, No. 4, 29.06.2021, p. 2035-2040.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Schäfer, S, Al-Qaddo, H, Gosau, M , Smeets, R , Hartjen, P , Friedrich, RE, Nada, OA, Vollkommer, T & Rashad, A 2021, 'Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes', IN VIVO, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 2035-2040. https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12472

APA

Schäfer, S., Al-Qaddo, H., Gosau, M., Smeets, R., Hartjen, P., Friedrich, R. E., Nada, O. A., Vollkommer, T., & Rashad, A. (2021). Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes. IN VIVO, 35(4), 2035-2040. https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12472

Vancouver

Schäfer S, Al-Qaddo H, Gosau M , Smeets R , Hartjen P , Friedrich RE et al. Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes. IN VIVO. 2021 Jun 29;35(4):2035-2040. https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12472

Bibtex

@article{b73b7ff2cb1a4cbf9dec0a2cb2dcaea6,

title = "Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes",

abstract = "BACKGROUND/AIM: With the demographic change and associated chronic bone loss, the need for cytocompatible bone replacement materials arise in modern medicine. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the cytocompatibility of eleven different bone substitute materials and membranes.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven bone substitute materials and four membranes were assessed in vitro. The specimens were tested based on their interaction with MC3T3 pre-osteoblasts, through the utilization of viability, proliferation, and cytotoxicity assays. Cell vitality was evaluated using live-dead staining.RESULTS: Although we found minor differences in cytocompatibility among the assessed materials, all tested materials can be considered as cytocompatible with a viability of more than 70% of the negative control, which indicates the non-toxic range as defined in current, international standards (DIN EN ISO 10993-5:2009, German Institute for Standardization, Berlin, Germany). Direct live-dead staining assays confirmed satisfactory cytocompatibility of all tested membranes.CONCLUSION: All examined bone substitute materials and membranes were found to be cytocompatible. In order to assess whether the observed minor differences can impact regenerative processes, further in vivo studies need to be conducted.",

keywords = "Biocompatible Materials, Bone Regeneration, Bone Substitutes, Germany, Materials Testing, Membranes, Artificial, Osteoblasts",

author = "Sogand Sch{\"a}fer and Hayder Al-Qaddo and Martin Gosau and Ralf Smeets and Philip Hartjen and Friedrich, {Reinhard E} and Nada, {Ola A} and Tobias Vollkommer and Ashkan Rashad",

year = "2021",

month = jun,

day = "29",

doi = "10.21873/invivo.12472",

language = "English",

volume = "35",

pages = "2035--2040",

journal = "IN VIVO",

issn = "0258-851X",

publisher = "International Institute of Anticancer Research",

number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes

AU - Schäfer, Sogand

AU - Al-Qaddo, Hayder

AU - Gosau, Martin

AU - Smeets, Ralf

AU - Hartjen, Philip

AU - Friedrich, Reinhard E

AU - Nada, Ola A

AU - Vollkommer, Tobias

AU - Rashad, Ashkan

PY - 2021/6/29

Y1 - 2021/6/29

N2 - BACKGROUND/AIM: With the demographic change and associated chronic bone loss, the need for cytocompatible bone replacement materials arise in modern medicine. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the cytocompatibility of eleven different bone substitute materials and membranes.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven bone substitute materials and four membranes were assessed in vitro. The specimens were tested based on their interaction with MC3T3 pre-osteoblasts, through the utilization of viability, proliferation, and cytotoxicity assays. Cell vitality was evaluated using live-dead staining.RESULTS: Although we found minor differences in cytocompatibility among the assessed materials, all tested materials can be considered as cytocompatible with a viability of more than 70% of the negative control, which indicates the non-toxic range as defined in current, international standards (DIN EN ISO 10993-5:2009, German Institute for Standardization, Berlin, Germany). Direct live-dead staining assays confirmed satisfactory cytocompatibility of all tested membranes.CONCLUSION: All examined bone substitute materials and membranes were found to be cytocompatible. In order to assess whether the observed minor differences can impact regenerative processes, further in vivo studies need to be conducted.

AB - BACKGROUND/AIM: With the demographic change and associated chronic bone loss, the need for cytocompatible bone replacement materials arise in modern medicine. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the cytocompatibility of eleven different bone substitute materials and membranes.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven bone substitute materials and four membranes were assessed in vitro. The specimens were tested based on their interaction with MC3T3 pre-osteoblasts, through the utilization of viability, proliferation, and cytotoxicity assays. Cell vitality was evaluated using live-dead staining.RESULTS: Although we found minor differences in cytocompatibility among the assessed materials, all tested materials can be considered as cytocompatible with a viability of more than 70% of the negative control, which indicates the non-toxic range as defined in current, international standards (DIN EN ISO 10993-5:2009, German Institute for Standardization, Berlin, Germany). Direct live-dead staining assays confirmed satisfactory cytocompatibility of all tested membranes.CONCLUSION: All examined bone substitute materials and membranes were found to be cytocompatible. In order to assess whether the observed minor differences can impact regenerative processes, further in vivo studies need to be conducted.

KW - Biocompatible Materials

KW - Bone Regeneration

KW - Bone Substitutes

KW - Germany

KW - Materials Testing

KW - Membranes, Artificial

KW - Osteoblasts

U2 - 10.21873/invivo.12472

DO - 10.21873/invivo.12472

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34182478

VL - 35

SP - 2035

EP - 2040

JO - IN VIVO

JF - IN VIVO

SN - 0258-851X

IS - 4

ER -