| Literature DB >> 34350164 |
Guofeng Wang1, Yaxin Zhu2, Xingjie Zan2, Meng Li1.
Abstract
There is a subsEntities:
Keywords: hydroxyapatite; multi-functionality; orthopedic coatings; osteogenesis; polyphenol
Year: 2021 PMID: 34350164 PMCID: PMC8327088 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.718255
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
SCHEME 1Schematic illustration of the molecular structure of (A) lysozyme (Lys), (B) tannic acid (TA), (C) hydroxyapatite (HA), (D) forming process of TA@HA, and (E) (TA@HA/Lys)n fabrication: (1) PEI was deposited on the substrate first, followed by the deposition of (2) TA@HA and (3) Lys, (4) repeating (2) and (3) with the desired number.
FIGURE 1(A) X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (XPS) spectra of tannic acid (TA), TA–8.5@HA, and hydroxyapatite (HA). (B) Carbon (C) and oxygen (O) contents and (C) Calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) contents in TA, TA–pH@HA, and HA. (D) Peak fitting in O1s of XPS spectra of TA, TA–pH@HA, and HA. (E) C-O and P = O contents in TA, TA–pH@HA, and HA relative to the total O calculated from (D). The line in all figures was used for eye guidance.
FIGURE 2(A) The thickness of (TA@HA/Lys)n–pH deposited at various pH values plotted as the function of a number of bilayers. (B) The thickness of (TA@HA/Lys)6–pH constructed at different pHs. (C) XPS spectra of lysozyme (Lys), (TA@HA/Lys)2–8.5, and (TA@HA/Lys)2.5–8.5. (D) Elemental content ratio of C:N in (TA@HA/Lys)n–8.5 as the function of a number of bilayers. The line in all figures was used for eye guidance.
FIGURE 3SEM images of (A) (TA@HA/Lys)2, (B) (TA@HA/Lys)4, and (C) (TA@HA/Lys)6, and the corresponding magnified images in the insets of the upper right. (D) Surface roughness calculated from the atomic force microscope (AFM) images of (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 coatings, the insets are the corresponding AFM images. The scale bars in (A–C) are 20 μm (200 nm in the insets). The scale bar in (D) is 2 μm.
FIGURE 4(A) Cell viability of mouse embryo osteoblast precursor cells (MC3T3-E1) cultured onto control, (TA@HA/Lys)2, (TA@HA/Lys)4, and (TA@HA/Lys)6 at 1, 3, 5, and 7 days. (B) Fluorescence images and (C) cell numbers of MC3T3-E1 cells cultured onto control, (TA@HA/Lys)2, (TA@HA/Lys)4, and (TA@HA/Lys)6 at day 5. (D) Cell viability of dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) cultured onto control, (TA@HA/Lys)2, (TA@HA/Lys)4, and (TA@HA/Lys)6 at 1, 3, 5, and 7 days. (E) Fluorescence images and (F) cell numbers of DPSCs cultured onto control, (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 at day 5. All images were using the same scale bar. **p < 0.01, ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 5(A) Morphologies of MC3T3-E1 cells and DPSCs cultured on glass coverslips as control (left row), (TA@HA/Lys)2 (middle row), and (TA@HA/Lys)4 (right row) substrates for 5 and 10 h. (B) Statistical cell area per cell and (C) cell number per mm2 of MC3T3-E1 cells. (D) Statistical cell area per cell and (E) cell number per mm2 of DPSCs. All images were using the same scale bar. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 6(A) Antioxidant activities of glass coverslips as control, (TA@HA/Lys)2, and (TA@HA/Lys)4 films evaluated by the fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) method. (B) Fluorescence microscopy images of MC3T3-E1 cells cultured on glass coverslips as control, (TA@HA/Lys)2, and (TA@HA/Lys)4 substrates before (top) and after (bottom) 10 μM hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) stimulation. (C) Cell area per cell and (D) cell number per mm2 of MC3T3-E1 cells on the above substrates were determined without/with 10 μM H2O2 stimulation. All images were using the same scale bar. ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 7SEM images of (A) Escherichia coli and (B) Staphylococcus aureus after exposure to control (glass coverslips, left row), (TA@HA/Lys)2 (middle row), and (TA@HA/Lys)4 (right row) coatings. Relative live bacteria number of (C) E. coli and (D) S. aureus in above films (the control group as a reference). All images were using the same scale bar.
FIGURE 8OD values at 570 nm after extracting the Alizarin Red S stained for evaluating the osteoblast mineralization of (A) MC3T3-E1 cells and (B) DPSCs cultured on glass coverslips as control, (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 films with/without induction solution for 14 days. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activities of (C) MC3T3-E1 cells and (D) DPSCs cultured on glass coverslips as control, (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 films for 7 and 14 days. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 9Expressions of genes in relation to osteogenic differentiation for DPSCs being inductively cultured on the (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 substrates and glass coverslips as control: (A) runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2), (B) osteonectin (ON), and (C) osteocalcin (OCN). **p < 0.01, ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 10(A) Bone regeneration images in the rabbit femur were reconstructed by the CT-Volume (CTVol) software in three-dimensional (3D) model, when titanium rods with a blank layer as control, (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 coatings implanted for 4 (top) and 8 weeks (bottom). (B) Bone volume (BV) fraction [BV/total volume (TV)] of control, (TA@HA/Lys)2 and (TA@HA/Lys)4 coatings group. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.