↓ Skip to main content

*Substituted Borosilicate Glasses with Improved Osteogenic Capacity for Bone Tissue Engineering

Overview of attention for article published in Tissue Engineering: Part A, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
*Substituted Borosilicate Glasses with Improved Osteogenic Capacity for Bone Tissue Engineering
Published in
Tissue Engineering: Part A, March 2017
DOI 10.1089/ten.tea.2016.0386
Pubmed ID
Authors

João S. Fernandes, Piergiorgio Gentile, Aileen Crawford, Ricardo A. Pires, Paul V. Hatton, Rui L. Reis

Abstract

Borosilicate bioactive glasses (BBGs) have shown the capacity to promote higher formation of new bone when compared with silicate bioactive glasses. Herein, we assessed the capacity of BBGs to induce osteogenic differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) as a function of their substituted divalent cations (Mg(2+), Ca(2+), Sr(2+)). To this purpose, we synthesized BBG particles by melt quenching. The cell viability, proliferation, and morphology (i.e., PrestoBlue(®), PicoGreen(®), and DAPI and Phalloidin stainings, respectively), as well as protein expression (i.e., alkaline phosphatase, ALP; osteopontin, OP; and osteocalcin, OC), of BM-MSCs in contact with BBGs were evaluated for 21 days. We observed an enhanced expression of bone-specific proteins (ALP, OP, and OC) and high mineralization of BM-MSCs under BBG-Mg and BBG-Sr-conditioned osteogenic media for concentrations of 20 and 50 mg/mL with low cytotoxic effects. Moreover, BBG-Sr, at a concentration of 50 mg/mL, was able to increase the mineralization and expression of the same bone-specific proteins even under basal medium conditions. These results indicated that the proposed BBGs improved osteogenic differentiation of BM-MSCs, therefore showing their potential as relevant biomaterials for bone tissue regeneration, not only by bonding to bone tissue but also by stimulating new bone formation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Professor 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 9 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Engineering 4 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Tissue Engineering: Part A
#1,189
of 1,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,551
of 323,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tissue Engineering: Part A
#29
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 1,842 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 323,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.