PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Biocompatible Materials”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2000

Binding of Lipid Vesicles to Protein-Coated Solid Polymer Surfaces: A Model for Cell Adhesion to Artificial Biocompatible Materials.

The adhesion of lipid vesicles (liposomes) having controlled chemical and physical structure to polymer supported human serum albumin (HSA) thin layers was investigated by a spectrofluorimetric technique. The vesicle lipid bilayer was labeled with a small amount of an apolar fluorescent probe (diphenylexathriene) and the vesicle suspension was set in contact with the protein film. After washing and drying, the adhering vesicles containing sample was dissolved in chloroform and the homogeneous solution was analyzed by standard spectrofluorimetric techniques. Different parameters of the lipid bilayer, suspending solution, and protein film were varied and their influence on the liposome binding was investigated. Concerning the lipid bilayer, we studied the effect of liposome surface charge by using different mixtures of neutral (dipalmitoyl-phosphatidylcholine) and charged (dipalmitoyl-phosphatidic acid) phospholipids and the fluid or gel nature of the lipid bilayer (switched on and off by temperature variation). Variations of the local environment involve Ca(2+) and H(+) changes in the millimolar range as well as different hydrodynamical flows (in the range 0.1-10 cm/s). Preliminary measurements using different protein layers were also performed. Results show: (a) negligible adhesion without the protein layer, (b) the presence of a maximum for the liposome adhesion vs ion concentration (depending on the liposome composition and kind of the adsorbed ions), (c) a much stronger adhesion for vesicles in the fluid phase (overcoming the entropy-driven desorption increase with temperature), and (d) a dramatic lowering of the adhesion capability under hydrodynamic flow. Points a-c have been interpreted on the basis of a simple mechanoelectrical model. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1996

Biocompatibility of posterior restorative materials.

Biocompatibility of dental materials is an important consideration for the patient, clinician, laboratory technician and manufacturer. This paper examines biocompatibility testing methods and the biocompatibility of posterior restorative materials, including amalgam, casting alloys, resin composites, dentin bonding agents, cements, porcelains and ceramics.

Acrylic Resins↗
PubMed1989

The cage implant system for determining in vivo biocompatibility of medical device materials.

Biocompatibility of an implanted material, drug delivery system, or prosthetic is a dynamic two-way process that involves the time-dependent effects of the host on the material and the material on the host. Implantation of any synthetic material initiates a wound-healing mechanism that is characterized by the inflammatory response. We have developed a novel implant system that enables quantitative as well as qualitative evaluation of the inflammatory response to implanted materials. The cage implant system can be used to quantify the cellular and enzymatic components of inflammation and permits access to study cellular adhesion and interactions with candidate biomaterials. The basic methodology of the implant system is described. The effectiveness of the system is illustrated by comparing the results for three contrasting materials: polyethylene, poly(vinyl-chloride) containing a stabilizer that is cytotoxic, and poly(DL-lactide) containing hydrocortisone acetate.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Hydroxyapatite/SiO(2)-CaO-P(2)O(5) glass materials: in vitro bioactivity and biocompatibility.

Materials obtained by the heat treatment of mixtures of hydroxyapatite (HA) and a silicate-based glass of the system SiO(2)-CaO-P(2)O(5) have been investigated. The influence of the glass content on the porosity, microstructure and on the constituent phases of the final materials was studied. The influence of these factors on the in vitro bioactive behaviour of the obtained materials was also investigated. In addition, an in vitro biocompatibility assay with osteoblastic-like cells was carried out. The addition of the glass to HA induced different solid-state reactions that yield the transformation of HA into alpha- and beta-tricalcium phosphate as well as the formation of silicon-containing phases (silicocarnotite or pseudowollastonite). In these mixtures an enhancement in the porosity, pore size and a heterogeneous microstructure was observed, compared with the precursors. As the sol gel glass content increased, the previous effects were higher. The materials showed the formation of an apatite-like layer on their surface when soaked in simulated body fluid, being faster in the sample with a higher content of glass. The formation of the new layer began in preferential zones in both samples, depending on the different reactivity of the crystalline phases formed. A synergistic effect between HA and glass was observed, showing in the mixtures a faster bioactive behaviour than in HA and glass themselves. The obtained materials allow a good attachment, spread and proliferation of the osteoblastic-like cells and no cytotoxic effect was observed.

Biocompatible Materials↗
PubMed2003

[Importance of cell cultures in biocompatible dental materials research].

The need for biocompatible materials implies the necessity of toxicity testing. The toxicity of a dental material can be evaluated by in vitro tests, by animal experimentation including usage tests, and by clinical studies in humans. In vitro studies are mainly performed to evaluate the cytotoxicity (cell damage) or the genotoxicity (specific DNA damage or chromosomal aberration) of a dental material. Cell or tissue cultures play an important role because they allow a maximum standardization. This paper describes their application and interpretation of results in biocompatibility tests.

Animals↗
PubMed1996

Studies on the biocompatibility of materials: fibroblast reorganization of substratum-bound fibronectin on surfaces varying in wettability.

The ability of human fibroblasts to remove and reorganize fibronectin (FN) bound on material surfaces was studied as a novel feature of material surface biocompatibility. Other traditional parameters of biocompatibility analyzed included cell spreading, clustering of fibronectin receptors into focal adhesions, development of stress fibers, and cell growth. Five different materials with surface wettability ranging from hydrophilic (underwater contact angle 25 degrees) to hydrophobic (underwater contact angle 111 degrees) were used, i.e., clean glass (GLASS), aminopropylsilane (APS), octadecylsilane (ODS), polylactate (PL), and silicone (SI). When cells were cultured on these materials in serum-containing medium, formation of FN receptor-rich focal adhesions and actin stress fibers were more evident on the hydrophilic surfaces (GLASS and APS) compared to the hydrophobic ones (PL, ODS, and SI). Cell growth showed a similar pattern, that is, increased cell proliferation with increasing material surface wettability. Preadsorption of FN on the material surfaces increased subsequent cell spreading and cytoskeletal reorganization on hydrophobic surfaces except SI. Removal and reorganization of FN from the material surfaces into extracellular matrixlike structures occurred on GLASS but not on less wettable surfaces, suggesting that this removal/reorganization process may be more sensitive to changes in surface wettability than other parameters of biocompatibility.

Actins↗
PubMed1994

In vitro evaluation of dental materials.

Biocompatibility has been described as the ability of a material to perform with an appropriate host response in a specific application. Appropriate host response means no (or a tolerable) adverse reaction of a living system to the presence of such a material. An adverse reaction may be due to the toxicity of a dental material. Therefore toxicity may be regarded as one reason for nonbiocompatibility of a dental material. The toxicity of a dental material can be evaluated by in vitro tests, animal experiments and clinical trials. There exists a variety of different in vitro test methods. The most widely used biological systems for toxicity screening of dental materials are cell cultures. Cell cultures for toxicity screening of dental materials are valuable tools for understanding their biological behavior, if the limitations of the methods are taken into consideration, especially concerning the interpretation of the results. Further research should concentrate on better simulations of the in vivo situation in cell cultures. In this review the applications of various cell culture methods to evaluate the cytotoxicity of a wide range of dental materials, e.g. metals, alloys, polymers and cements, are described.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Formation of melanocyte spheroids on the chitosan-coated surface.

The search for biocompatible materials that can maintain function of melanocytes as the cellular patch is a feasible alternative for use in the autologous melanocyte transplantation for vitiligo. In this study, we demonstrated that the surface of chitosan-coated polystyrene wells supported the growth and phenotype expression of melanocytes. Depending on the seeding density and culture time, melanocytes were monolayered or spheroidal in morphology. At seeding densities above 10 x 10(3) cells/cm2, human melanocytes started to aggregate on the surface of chitosan after 2 days in culture. These aggregates grew into compact melanocyte spheroids on day 3 and more melanocyte spheroids were observed when a higher seeding density was used. Cells remained viable in the spheroids and grew into dendritic melanocytes when they were reinoculated on polystyrene wells. Conversely, the time for the formation of melanocyte spheroids needed a longer period at lower seeding density. For example, melanocytes at as low as 1.25 x 10(3) cells/cm2 did not aggregate until the 20th day of culture. In order to interpret the phenomenon further, we proposed the formation of melanocyte spheroids on the chitosan is mediated by a balance between two competing forces: the interactions of cell-chitosan and cell-cell.

Cell Adhesion↗
PubMed2006

Biocompatibility of materials implanted into the subretinal space of Yucatan pigs.

PURPOSE: To assess the biocompatibility of materials for possible use in subretinal prostheses. METHODS: Strips (0.5 x 5 mm; 10-microm thick) of either plain poly(imide) or poly(imide) coated with amorphous aluminum oxide (AAO), amorphous carbon (AC), parylene, poly(vinyl pyrrolidone) (PVP), or poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) were each implanted into the subretinal space of four Yucatan miniature pigs. Two types of control surgery without implantation were performed in four other animals. Electroretinograms (ERGs) were performed before and after surgery. All animals were euthanatized 3 months after surgery, and histologic slides of the retina were assessed for 15 criteria. Paired, two-tailed Student's t-tests were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Across all animals, the mean amplitude of the ERG b-wave did not differ from baseline after 3 months. In implanted animals, the histologic analyses revealed that (1) all the implanted materials produced abnormalities that were significantly greater than in the control subjects; (2) overall, PEG, parylene, and PVP produced less histologic disruption than the other three materials; (3) parylene and PEG did not differ significantly from the control in disturbing retinal anatomy; (4) only PI and AAO produced RPE alterations that were significantly greater than in control subjects; and (5) AAO and PI produced a significantly greater degree of peri-implant cellular responses than did the other materials. CONCLUSIONS: All implants produced some alteration of the retina, but there were clear differences among the materials in the degree to which their presence disturbed the normal anatomy of the retina or RPE or incited tissue reactions around the implant.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

An evaluation of accelerated Portland cement as a restorative material.

Biocompatibility of two variants of accelerated Portland cement (APC) were investigated in vitro by observing the cytomorphology of SaOS-2 osteosarcoma cells in the presence of test materials and the effect of these materials on the expression of markers of bone remodelling. Glass ionomer cement (GIC), mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and unmodified Portland cement (RC) were used for comparison. A direct contact assay was undertaken in four samples of each test material, collected at 12, 24, 48 and 72 h. Cell morphology was observed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and scored. Culture media were collected for cytokine quantification using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). On SEM evaluation, healthy SaOS-2 cells were found adhering onto the surfaces of APC variant, RC and MTA. In contrast, rounded and dying cells were observed on GIC. Using ELISA, levels of interleukin (IL)-1beta, IL-6, IL-18 and OC were significantly higher in APC variants compared with controls and GIC (p<0.01), but these levels of cytokines were not statistically significant compared with MTA. The results of this study provide evidence that both APC variants are non-toxic and may have potential to promote bone healing. Further development of APC is indicated to produce a viable dental restorative material and possibly a material for orthopaedic

Biocompatible Materials↗
PubMed1992

Biocompatibility and biofunctionality of implanted materials.

The mechanical and chemical properties of metals, such as titanium, titanium-based alloys and cobalt-based alloys, and ceramics, such as Bioglass and calcium phosphate, make them suitable for implant applications. However, several factors affect the biologic response to these implanted materials. The predominant tissue found at the implant interface is affected by implant stability, material biocompatibility, and implant design and implant placement into the surgical site. Improvements in implant design and surface preparation may improve implant longevity and fixation for all implants materials.

Animals↗