| Title |
Effects of nanoporous anodic titanium oxide on human adipose derived stem cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s116263 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katarzyna Malec, Joanna Góralska, Magdalena Hubalewska-Mazgaj, Paulina Głowacz, Magdalena Jarosz, Pawel Brzewski, Grzegorz D Sulka, Marian Jaskuła, Iwona Wybrańska |
| Abstract |
The aim of current bone biomaterials research is to design implants that induce controlled, guided, successful, and rapid healing. Titanium implants are widely used in dental, orthopedic, and reconstructive surgery. A series of studies has indicated that cells can respond not only to the chemical properties of the biomaterial, but also, in particular, to the changes in surface topography. Nanoporous materials remain in focus of scientific queries due to their exclusive properties and broad applications. One such material is nanostructured titanium oxide with highly ordered, mutually perpendicular nanopores. Nanoporous anodic titanium dioxide (TiO2) films were fabricated by a three-step anodization process in propan-1,2,3-triol-based electrolyte containing fluoride ions. Adipose-derived stem cells offer many interesting opportunities for regenerative medicine. The important goal of tissue engineering is to direct stem cell differentiation into a desired cell lineage. The influence of nanoporous TiO2 with pore diameters of 80 and 108 nm on cell response, growth, viability, and ability to differentiate into osteoblastic lineage of human adipose-derived progenitors was explored. Cells were harvested from the subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue by a simple, minimally invasive, and inexpensive method. Our results indicate that anodic nanostructured TiO2 is a safe and nontoxic biomaterial. In vitro studies demonstrated that the nanotopography induced and enhanced osteodifferentiation of human adipose-derived stem cells from the abdominal subcutaneous fat tissue. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 11% |
| Materials Science | 5 | 11% |
| Engineering | 4 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,913,921
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,586
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,585
of 332,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#36
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
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 332,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.