| Literature DB >> 35415306 |
Bo Yuan1,2, Hewei Chen1,2, Rui Zhao1,2, Xuangeng Deng3, Guo Chen3, Xiao Yang1,2, Zhanwen Xiao1,2, Antoniac Aurora4, Bita Ana Iulia4, Kai Zhang1,2, Xiangdong Zhu1,2, Antoniac Vasile Iulian4,5, Shen Hai3, Xingdong Zhang1,2.
Abstract
The improved corrosion resistance, osteogenic activity, and antibacterial ability are the key factors for promoting the large-scale clinical application of magnesium (Mg)-based implants. In the present study, a novel nanocomposite coating composed of inner magnesium hydroxide, middle graphene oxide, and outer hydroxyapatite (Mg(OH)2/GO/HA) is constructed on the surface of Mg-0.8Ca-5Zn-1.5Ag by a combined strategy of hydrothermal treatment, electrophoretic deposition, and electrochemical deposition. The results of material characterization and electrochemical corrosion test showed that all the three coatings have high bonding strength, hydrophilicity and corrosion resistance. In vitro studies show that Mg(OH)2 indeed improves the antibacterial activity of the substrate. The next GO and GO/HA coating procedures both promote the osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 cells and show no harm to the antibacterial activity of Mg(OH)2 coating, but the latter exhibits the best promoting effect. In vivo studies demonstrate that the Mg alloy with the composite coating not only ameliorates osteolysis induced by bacterial invasion but also promotes bone regeneration under both normal and infected conditions. The current study provides a promising surface modification strategy for developing multifunctional Mg-based implants with good corrosion resistance, antibacterial ability and osteogenic activity to enlarge their biomedical applications.Entities:
Keywords: Antibacterial ability; Composite coating; Corrosion resistance; Mg alloy; Osteogenic activity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35415306 PMCID: PMC8965913 DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.02.030
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioact Mater ISSN: 2452-199X
Fig. 1Preparation and morphological characterization of various ZQ71 samples. (A) Schematic illustration of the preparation of various ZQ71 samples. (B) Surface SEM images and EDS analysis and (C) cross-section SEM images of various ZQ71 samples.
Fig. 2Surface characterization of various ZQ71 samples. (A) Surface AFM images and (B) corresponding surface roughness of various ZQ71 samples. (C) The morphologies and contact angles of water droplets on the surface of various ZQ71 samples. (D) FTIR spectra and (E) XRD patterns of various ZQ71 samples. (F) Bonding strength of various coating. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Fig. 3Electrochemical testing results of various ZQ71 samples. (A) The open circuit potential, (B) Potentiodynamic polarization curves, (C) Nyquist plots, (D) Bode plots of phase angle vs. frequency, and (E) Bode plots of |Z| vs. frequency of various ZQ71 samples in PBS solution at 37 °C. (F) The electrochemical equivalent circuit model of various ZQ71 samples.
Fig. 4In vitro cytocompatibility of various ZQ71 samples. (A) CLSM images of the cells stained by FDA and PI. (B) CLSM images of the cell cytoskeleton (red) and nucleus (blue) stained by rhodamine-phalloidin and DAPI. (C) Cell viability of MC3T3-E1 cultured with different ZQ71 samples at day 1, 2 and 3. (D–H) qRT-PCR analysis for several osteogenic gene expression of MC3T3-E1 cultured with different ZQ71 samples at day 3, 7 and 11. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001)
Fig. 5In vitro antibacterial activity of various ZQ71 samples. The antibacterial rates of different samples against (A) S. aureus and (B) E. coli. (C) SEM images of bacteria on the surface of the ZQ71 samples after incubation at 37 °C for 12 h. (D) Culture of bacterial colonies on different samples. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Fig. 6In vivo antibacterial activity of various ZQ71 samples after implantation in a bacteria-infection model for 7 days. (A) White blood cell counts in the blood of the rats. (B) Images of S. aureus colonization on the surface of the ZQ71 implants by the spreading plate and (C) corresponding quantitative analysis results. (D) SEM observation on the residual bacteria colonized on the surface of the implants. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Fig. 7μ-CT evaluation for the in vivo degradation and bone formation under normal and bacteria-infection conditions. Reconstructed micro-CT images of metaphyseal bone within the defective region (red dotted line) in (A) normal and (B) bacterial models at 4 weeks postoperatively. Upper right corner of each sample: the new bone formation within the defective region (gray). Bottom right corner of each sample: the residual alloy materials (white). (C) BV/TV: the percent volume of the newly formed bone (BV) relative to the total volume of the defect area. (D) The volume reduction rate of the implants: the percent volume of the degraded materials (ΔMV) relative to their paired initial volume (MV). (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001)
Fig. 8Histological analysis for the bone regeneration under normal and bacteria-infection conditions. H&E staining of histological sections from different ZQ71 implants in (A) normal and (B) bacterial models at 4 weeks postoperatively. in vivo sequential fluorescent labeling of new bone formation in (C) normal and (D) bacterial models (Yellow: tetracycline label, Green: calcein label). The new bone substitution rates and the area reduction rate of the implants in (E) normal and (F) bacterial models. (B: bone tissue, M: material) (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001)