| Title |
Combination of calcium sulfate and simvastatin-controlled release microspheres enhances bone repair in critical-sized rat calvarial bone defects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s88134 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yin-Chih Fu, Yan-Hsiung Wang, Chung-Hwan Chen, Chih-Kuang Wang, Gwo-Jaw Wang, Mei-Ling Ho |
| Abstract |
Most allogenic bone graft substitutes have only osteoconductive properties. Developing new strategies to improve the osteoinductive activity of bone graft substitutes is both critical and practical for clinical application. Previously, we developed novel simvastatin-encapsulating poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres (SIM/PLGA) that slowly release simvastatin and enhance fracture healing. In this study, we combined SIM/PLGA with a rapidly absorbable calcium sulfate (CS) bone substitute and studied the effect on bone healing in critical-sized calvarial bone defects in a rat model. The cytotoxicity and cytocompatibility of this combination was tested in vitro using lactate dehydrogenase leakage and a cell attachment assay, respectively. Combination treatment with SIM/PLGA and the CS bone substitute had no cytotoxic effect on bone marrow stem cells. Compared with the control, cell adhesion was substantially enhanced following combination treatment with SIM/PLGA and the CS bone substitute. In vivo, implantation of the combination bone substitute promoted healing of critical-sized calvarial bone defects in rats; furthermore, production of bone morphogenetic protein-2 and neovascularization were enhanced in the area of the defect. In summary, the combination of SIM/PLGA and a CS bone substitute has osteoconductive and osteoinductive properties, indicating that it could be used for regeneration of bone in the clinical setting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 24% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,469
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,675
of 395,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#67
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 395,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.