Search

Bionanocomposite scaffolds based on aliphatic polyurethane (PU) and bioactive glass nanoparticles were produced by using a one-step in situ polymerization method. Bioactive glass nanoparticles (nBG) or mesoporous BG nanospheres (nMBG) were incorporated during the polymerization reaction to produce simultaneous formation and foaming of porous nanocomposite scaffolds. The in vitro bioactivity of the scaffolds was assessed in simulated body fluid (SBF), and through cytocompatibility and osteogenic differentiation assays with stem cells. Bone regeneration properties of the scaffold materials were in vivo assessed by using a critical-sized femoral defect model in rat. The scaffold nanocomposites showed excellent cytocompatibility and ability to accelerate the crystallization of bone-like apatite in vitro. nBG/PU bionanocomposite scaffold exhibited the higher capacity to stimulate osteogenic cell differentiation as judged by an increased ALP activity and the presence of mineralized nodules associated with the stem cells. nBG (5%)/PU scaffold significantly also produces in vivo a denser and more significant amount of new bone after 8 weeks of implantation, which is attributed to the more rapid dissolution rate of nBG into osteogenic ionic products compared to nMBG. The results of this work show that the in situ polymerization method combined with the use of nanodimensional BG particles enable the production of PU – based scaffolds with enhanced bioactive properties to stimulate the bone tissue regeneration.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of two platelet preparations used in the clinic, pure platelet-rich plasma (P-PRP) and the supernatant of calcium-activated P-PRP (S-PRP), on the phenotype of human macrophages. Materials & methods: Surface markers and cytokine production of human monocyte-derived macrophages were analyzed after 24 h stimulation with P-PRP or S-PRP. Results: P-PRP and S-PRP present no difference in the expression of CD206, a M2 tissue-repair macrophage-related marker. However, these same macrophages presented different levels of CD163, CD86 as well as different IL-10 secretion capacities after 24 h incubation. Conclusion: These platelet preparations do not have an equivalent biological effect over macrophages, which suggest that they may present different clinical regenerative potentials.