Comparison of different hydroxyapatite composites for bone tissue repair: In vitro and in vivo analyses

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

School of Basic Medical Sciences, Clinical Medical College and Affiliated Hospital, Chengdu University, Chengdu, 610106, China

10.22038/ijbms.2024.78578.16995

Abstract

Objective(s): The material used for bone tissue repair needs to be simultaneously osteoconductive, osteoinductive, and osteogenic. To overcome this problem, researchers combine hydroxyapatite (HA) with natural materials to improve properties. This paper compares the effects of angiogenesis and osteogenesis with different composites through in vivo experiments and characterization analysis. 
Materials and Methods: Chitosan/nHA (CS/nHA) and sodium alginate/nHA (SA/nHA) microspheres were synthesized via reverse-phase emulsification crosslinking and analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersion spectroscopy (EDS), and X-ray diffraction (XRD). Implanted into mouse thigh muscles, their angiogenic and osteogenic potentials were assessed after 8 and 12 weeks through various staining methods and immunohistochemistry. 
Results: The mean vascular density (MVD) of CS/nHA, CaP/nHA, and SA/nHA groups was (134.92±35.30) n/mm2, (159.09±22.14) n/mm2, (160.31±42.23) n/mm2 at 12 weeks, respectively. The MVD of the CaP/nHA and SA/nHA groups were significantly higher than that of the CS/nHA group. The collagen volume fractions (CVF) were 34.13%, 51.53%, and 54.96% in the CS/nHA, CaP/nHA, and SA/nHA groups, respectively. In addition, the positive expression area ratios of OPN and CD31 in the CaP/nHA and SA/nHA groups were also significantly higher than those in the CS/nHA group.
Conclusion: The ability of SA/nHA composite microspheres in osteogenesis and angiogenesis is clearly superior to that of the CS/nHA group and is comparable to that of CaP/nHA, which has superior osteogenesis ability, indicating that SA/nHA composite microspheres have greater application prospects in bone tissue engineering.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Steijvers E, Ghei A, Xia Z. Manufacturing artificial bone allografts: a perspective. Biomater Transl 2022; 3:65-80.
2. Schmidt AH. Autologous bone graft: Is it still the gold standard? Injury 2021; 52:18-22.
3. Sohn HS, Oh JK. Review of bone graft and bone substitutes with an emphasis on fracture surgeries. Biomater Res 2019; 23:9-16.
4. Valtanen RS, Yang YP, Gurtner GC, Maloney WJ, Lowenberg DW. Synthetic and bone tissue engineering graft substitutes: What is the future? Injury 2021; 52:72-77.
5. Lim KT, Patel DK, Dutta SD, Choung HW, Jin H, Bhattacharjee A, et al. Human teeth-derived bioceramics for improved bone regeneration. Nanomaterials (Basel) 2020; 10:2396-2412.
6. Kaneko S, Yamamoto Y, Wada K, Kumagai G, Harada Y, Yamauchi R, et al. Ultraviolet irradiation improves the hydrophilicity and osteo-conduction of hydroxyapatite. J Orthop Surg Res 2020; 15:425-433.
7. Liao J, Li Y, Li H, Liu J, Xie Y, Wang J, et al. Preparation, bioactivity and mechanism of nano-hydroxyapatite/sodium alginate/chitosan bone repair material. J Appl Biomater Func 2018; 16: 28-35.
8. Lowe B, Venkatesan J, Anil S, Shim MS, Kim SK. Preparation and characterization of chitosan-natural nano hydroxyapatite-fucoidan nanocomposites for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 2016; 93:1479-1487.
 9. Liang T, Wu J, Li F, Huang Z, Pi Y, Miao G, et al. Drug-loading three-dimensional scaffolds based on hydroxyapatite-sodium alginate for bone regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res A 2021; 109:219-231.
10. Chatzipetros E, Damaskos S, Tosios KI, Christopoulos P, Donta C, Kalogirou EM, et al. The effect of nano-hydroxyapatite/chitosan scaffolds on rat calvarial defects for bone regeneration. Int J Implant Dent 2021; 7:40-51.
11. Soriente A, Fasolino I, Gomez-Sanchez A, Prokhorov E, Buonocore GG, Luna-Barcenas G, et al. Chitosan/hydroxyapatite nanocomposite scaffolds to modulate osteogenic and inflammatory response. J Biomed Mater Res A 2022; 110:266-272.
12. Niu Y, Chen L, Wu T. Recent advances in bioengineering bone revascularization based on composite materials comprising hydroxyapatite. Int J Mol Sci 2023; 24:12492-12515.
13. Chircov C, Miclea II, Grumezescu V, Grumezescu AM. Essential oils for bone repair and regeneration-mechanisms and applications. Materials 2021; 14:1867-1887.
14. Anada T, Pan CC, Stahl  AM, Mori S, Fukuda J, Suzuki O, et al. Vascularized bone-mimetic hydrogel constructs by 3D bioprinting to promote osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20:1096-1107.
15. Dong C, Tan G, Zhang G, Lin W, Wang G. The function of immunomodulation and biomaterials for scaffold in the process of bone defect repair: a review. Front Bioeng Biotech 2023; 11:1-14.
16. Gotz W, Reichert C, Canullo L, Jager A, Heinemann F. Coupling of osteogenesis and angiogenesis in bone substitute healing - a brief overview. Ann Anat 2012; 194:171-173.
17. Shi Z, Yang F, Pang Q, Hu Y, Wu H, Yu X, et al. The osteogenesis and the biologic mechanism of thermo-responsive injectable hydrogel containing carboxymethyl chitosan/sodium alginate nanoparticles towards promoting osteal wound healing. Int J Biol Macromol 2023; 224:533-543.
18. Maghsoudlou MA, Nassireslami E, Saber-Samandari S, Khandan A. Bone regeneration using bio-nanocomposite tissue reinforced with bioactive nanoparticles for femoral defect applications in medicine. Avicenna J Med Biotechnol 2020; 12:68-76.
19. Foroutan S, Hashemian M, Khosravi M, Nejad MG, Asefnejad A, Saber-Samandari S, et al. A porous sodium alginate-CaSiO3 polymer reinforced with graphene nanosheet: Fabrication and optimality analysis. Fiber Polym 2021; 22:540-549.
20. Bagherifard A, Yekta HJ, Aghdam HA, Motififard M, Sanatizadeh E, Nejad MG, et al. Improvement in osseointegration of tricalcium phosphate-zircon for orthopedic applications: an in vitro and in vivo evaluation. Med Biol Eng Comput 2020; 58:1681-1693.
21. Khalaf AT, Wei Y, Wan J, Zhu J, Peng Y, Abdul KS, et al. Bone tissue engineering through 3D bioprinting of bioceramic scaffolds: a review and update. Life (Basel) 2022; 12:903-931.
22. Zheng BD, Yu YZ, Yuan XL, Chen XS, Yang YC, Zhang N, et al. Sodium alginate/carboxymethyl starch/kappa-carrageenan enteric soft capsule: processing, characterization, and rupture time evaluation. Int J Biol Macromol 2023; 244:125427.
23. Devi GVY, Nagendra AH, Shenoy PS, Chatterjee K, Venkatesan J. Fucoidan-incorporated composite scaffold stimulates osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells for bone tissue engineering. Mar Drugs 2022; 20:589-611.
24. Li M, Bai Y, Pan X, Wang J, Chen W, Luio J, et al. Study on the correlation between the content of bone morphogenetic protein 2 in demineralized bone matrix and its osteogenic activity in vitro and in vivo. Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi 2021; 35:620-626.
25. Zhang H, Cheng J, Ao Q. Preparation of alginate-based biomaterials and their applications in biomedicine. Mar Drugs 2021; 19:620-626.
26. He Y, Tian Y, Zhang W, Wang X, Yang X, Li B, et al. Fabrication of oxidized sodium alginate-collagen heterogeneous bilayer barrier membrane with osteogenesis-promoting ability. Int J Biol Macromol 2022; 202:55-67.
27. Pravdyuk AI, Petrenko YA, Fuller BJ, Petrenko AY. Cryopreservation of alginate encapsulated mesenchymal stromal cells. Cryobiology 2013; 66:215-222.
28. Park JH, Lee EJ, Knowles JC, Kim HW. Preparation of in situ hardening composite microcarriers: calcium phosphate cement combined with alginate for bone regeneration. J Biomater Appl 2014; 28:1079-1084.
29. Yi M, Nie Y, Zhang C, Shen B. Application of mesoporous silica nanoparticle-chitosan-loaded BMP-2 in the repair of bone defect in chronic osteomyelitis. J Immunol Res 2022; 2022:1-11.
30. Luo Y, Lode A, Wu C, Chang J, Gelinsky M. Alginate/nanohydroxyapatite scaffolds with designed core/shell structures fabricated by 3D plotting and in situ mineralization for bone tissue engineering. ACS Appl Mater Inter 2015; 7:6541-6549.
31. Chae T, Yang H, Leung V, Ko F, Troczynski T. Novel biomimetic hydroxyapatite/alginate nanocomposite fibrous scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2013; 24:1885-1894.
32. Yu H, Cauchois G, Louvet N, Chen Y, Rahouadj R, Huselstein C. Comparison of MSC properties in two different hydrogels. Impact of mechanical properties. Bio Med Mater Eng 2017; 28:193-200.
33. Ding C, Teng S, Pan H. In-situ generation of chitosan/hydroxyapatite composite microspheres for biomedical application. Mater Lett 2012; 79:72-74.
34. Li Z, Ramay HR, Hauch KD, Xiao D, Zhang M. Chitosan-alginate hybrid scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2005; 26:3919-3928.
35. Vasilyev AV, Kuznetsova VS, Bukharova TB, Grigoriev TE, Zagoskin YD, Nedorubova IA, et al. Influence of the degree of deacetylation of chitosan and BMP-2 concentration on biocompatibility and osteogenic properties of BMP-2/PLA granule-loaded chitosan/beta-glycerophosphate hydrogels. Molecules 2021; 26:261-283.
36. Wu X, Stroll SI, Lantigua D, Suvarnapathaki S, Camci-Unal G. Eggshell particle-reinforced hydrogels for bone tissue engineering: an orthogonal approach. Biomater Sci 2019; 7:2675-2685.
37. Muzzarelli RAA, Mattioli-Belmonte M, Tietz C, Biagini R, Ferioli G, Brunelli M, et al. Stimulatory effect on bone formation exerted by a modified chitosan. Biomaterials 1994; 15:1075-1081.
38. Ressler A. Chitosan-based biomaterials for bone tissue engineering applications: a short review. Polymers (Basel) 2022; 14:3430-1448.
Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences
Volume 27, Issue 9
September 2024
Pages 1155-1161

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics