Comparison of Physicochemical, Mechanical, and (Micro-)Biological Properties of Sintered Scaffolds Based on Natural- and Synthetic Hydroxyapatite Supplemented with Selected Dopants
Overview
Chemistry
Molecular Biology
Authors
Affiliations
The specific combinations of materials and dopants presented in this work have not been previously described. The main goal of the presented work was to prepare and compare the different properties of newly developed composite materials manufactured by sintering. The synthetic- (SHAP) or natural- (NHAP) hydroxyapatite serves as a matrix and was doped with: (i) organic: multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), fullerenes C60, (ii) inorganic: Cu nanowires. Research undertaken was aimed at seeking novel candidates for bone replacement biomaterials based on hydroxyapatite-the main inorganic component of bone, because bone reconstructive surgery is currently mostly carried out with the use of autografts; titanium or other non-hydroxyapatite -based materials. The physicomechanical properties of the developed biomaterials were tested by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Dielectric Spectroscopy (BSD), Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR), and Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC), as well as microhardness using Vickers method. The results showed that despite obtaining porous sinters. The highest microhardness was achieved for composite materials based on NHAP. Based on NMR spectroscopy, residue organic substances could be observed in NHAP composites, probably due to the organic structures that make up the tooth. Microbiology investigations showed that the selected samples exhibit bacteriostatic properties against Gram-positive reference bacterial strain (ATCC 12228); however, the property was much less pronounced against Gram-negative reference strain (ATCC 25922). Both NHAP and SHAP, as well as their doped derivates, displayed in good general compatibility, with the exception of Cu-nanowire doped derivates.
Chen T, Luo L, Li J, Li J, Lin T, Liu M Mater Today Bio. 2025; 31:101531.
PMID: 40026627 PMC: 11869124. DOI: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.101531.
Biomimetic Natural Biomaterial Nanocomposite Scaffolds: A Rising Prospect for Bone Replacement.
Zaczek-Moczydlowska M, Joszko K, Kavoosi M, Markowska A, Likus W, Ghavami S Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 25(24.
PMID: 39769231 PMC: 11678580. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252413467.
Skubis-Sikora A, Hudecki A, Sikora B, Wieczorek P, Hermyt M, Hreczka M Biomedicines. 2024; 12(9).
PMID: 39335462 PMC: 11428512. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12091949.
Draghici M, Mitrut I, Salan A, Marasescu P, Caracas R, Camen A Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2023; 64(1):49-55.
PMID: 37128791 PMC: 10257783. DOI: 10.47162/RJME.64.1.06.
Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Biomaterials and Their Effect on Cell Differentiation.
Geevarghese R, Sajjadi S, Hudecki A, Sajjadi S, Jalal N, Madrakian T Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23(24).
PMID: 36555829 PMC: 9785373. DOI: 10.3390/ijms232416185.