| Title |
Degradability, cytocompatibility, and osteogenesis of porous scaffolds of nanobredigite and PCL–PEG–PCL composite
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s97063 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Hou, Donghui Fan, Lingming Zhao, Baoqin Yu, Jiacan Su, Jie Wei, Jung-Woog Shin |
| Abstract |
Biocomposite scaffolds were fabricated by incorporation of nanobredigite (n-BD) into the polymer of poly(ε-caprolactone)-poly(ethyleneglycol)-poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL-PEG-PCL). The results revealed that the addition of n-BD into PCL-PEG-PCL significantly improved water absorption, compressive strength, and degradability of the scaffolds of n-BD/PCL-PEG-PCL composite (n-BPC) compared with PCL-PEG-PCL scaffolds alone. In addition, the proliferation and alkaline phosphatase activity of MG63 cells cultured on n-BPC scaffolds were obviously higher than that cultured on PCL-PEG-PCL scaffolds. Moreover, the results of the histological evaluation from the animal model revealed that the n-BPC scaffolds significantly improved new bone formation compared with the PCL-PEG-PCL scaffolds, indicating good osteogenesis. The n-BPC scaffolds with good biocompatibility could stimulate cell proliferation, differentiation, and bone tissue regeneration and would be an excellent candidate for bone defect repair. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 23% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 23% |
| Engineering | 2 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,087
of 4,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,554
of 367,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#73
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.