| Title |
The diameter of nanotubes formed on Ti-6Al-4V alloy controls the adhesion and differentiation of Saos-2 cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s87474 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena Filova, Jaroslav Fojt, Marketa Kryslova, Hynek Moravec, Ludek Joska, Lucie Bacakova |
| Abstract |
Ti-6Al-4V-based nanotubes were prepared on a Ti-6Al-4V surface by anodic oxidation on 10 V, 20 V, and 30 V samples. The 10 V, 20 V, and 30 V samples and a control smooth Ti-6Al-4V sample were evaluated in terms of their chemical composition, diameter distribution, and cellular response. The surfaces of the 10 V, 20 V, and 30 V samples consisted of nanotubes of a relatively wide range of diameters that increased with the voltage. Saos-2 cells had a similar initial adhesion on all nanotube samples to the control Ti-6Al-4V sample, but it was lower than on glass. On day 3, the highest concentrations of both vinculin and talin measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and intensity of immunofluorescence staining were on 30 V nanotubes. On the other hand, the highest concentrations of ALP, type I collagen, and osteopontin were found on 10 V and 20 V samples. The final cellular densities on 10 V, 20 V, and 30 V samples were higher than on glass. Therefore, the controlled anodization of Ti-6Al-4V seems to be a useful tool for preparing nanostructured materials with desirable biological properties. |
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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 20% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Materials Science | 18 | 32% |
| Engineering | 11 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
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 22 November 2015.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,088
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,047
of 294,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#70
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 4,123 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 294,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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.