Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/180070 |
Resumo: | Bone substitutes based on hydroxyapatite (HA) and Bonefill® (BO-inorganic bovine bone) associated with poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) (HA/PLGA and BO/PLGA) were evaluated concerning cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity as potential candidates for bone repair. The materials were developed and provided by Bionnovation Biomedical Products Ltda. Eluates from these bone substitutes were prepared for toxicity evaluations using eukaryotic cell cultures. HA/PLGA was used as a comparison for Bonefill®. Cell viability was evaluated by XTT assay and surviving fraction was calculated for clonogenic survival. Additionally, tail moment was used to assess genotoxicity (comet assay). The frequencies of binucleated cells with micronucleus (FBMN), micronucleus (FMN), nucleoplasmic bridges (NPBs), and nuclear buds (NBUDs) were analysed by cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN assay). Results showed no statistical difference in cell viability compared with negative control (NC) The eluates did not promote delayed cytotoxicity whereas the surviving fraction rate for cultured cells was similar to NC. Furthermore, no genotoxicity or mutagenicity effects were observed for cultured cells with the Bonefill/PLGA and HA/PLGA eluates. In conclusion, the negative cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity results indicate that these bone substitutes presented interesting preliminary results as potential biomaterials for bone repair. |
id |
UNSP_01132d69c720fd5803c98a4e16029b62 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/180070 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluationBiomaterials/evaluationBone regenerationBonefill®/toxicityHydroxyapatiteBone substitutes based on hydroxyapatite (HA) and Bonefill® (BO-inorganic bovine bone) associated with poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) (HA/PLGA and BO/PLGA) were evaluated concerning cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity as potential candidates for bone repair. The materials were developed and provided by Bionnovation Biomedical Products Ltda. Eluates from these bone substitutes were prepared for toxicity evaluations using eukaryotic cell cultures. HA/PLGA was used as a comparison for Bonefill®. Cell viability was evaluated by XTT assay and surviving fraction was calculated for clonogenic survival. Additionally, tail moment was used to assess genotoxicity (comet assay). The frequencies of binucleated cells with micronucleus (FBMN), micronucleus (FMN), nucleoplasmic bridges (NPBs), and nuclear buds (NBUDs) were analysed by cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN assay). Results showed no statistical difference in cell viability compared with negative control (NC) The eluates did not promote delayed cytotoxicity whereas the surviving fraction rate for cultured cells was similar to NC. Furthermore, no genotoxicity or mutagenicity effects were observed for cultured cells with the Bonefill/PLGA and HA/PLGA eluates. In conclusion, the negative cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity results indicate that these bone substitutes presented interesting preliminary results as potential biomaterials for bone repair.São Paulo State University (UNESP) School of Pharmaceutical SciencesSão Paulo State University (UNESP) School of DentistrySão Paulo State University (UNESP) School of Pharmaceutical SciencesSão Paulo State University (UNESP) School of DentistryUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Melchior, Karine [UNESP]Saska, Sybele [UNESP]Coelho, Fernanda [UNESP]Scarel-Caminaga, Raquel Mantuaneli [UNESP]Capote, Ticiana Sidorenko de Oliveira [UNESP]2018-12-11T17:37:53Z2018-12-11T17:37:53Z2018-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, v. 54, n. 2, 2018.2175-97901984-8250http://hdl.handle.net/11449/18007010.1590/s2175-97902018000217438S1984-825020180002006112-s2.0-85050856017S1984-82502018000200611.pdfScopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengBrazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences0,2140,214info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-09-27T15:15:10Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/180070Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-09-27T15:15:10Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
title |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
spellingShingle |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation Melchior, Karine [UNESP] Biomaterials/evaluation Bone regeneration Bonefill®/toxicity Hydroxyapatite |
title_short |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
title_full |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
title_fullStr |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
title_sort |
Bonefill® block as alternative for bone substitute: A toxicological evaluation |
author |
Melchior, Karine [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Melchior, Karine [UNESP] Saska, Sybele [UNESP] Coelho, Fernanda [UNESP] Scarel-Caminaga, Raquel Mantuaneli [UNESP] Capote, Ticiana Sidorenko de Oliveira [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Saska, Sybele [UNESP] Coelho, Fernanda [UNESP] Scarel-Caminaga, Raquel Mantuaneli [UNESP] Capote, Ticiana Sidorenko de Oliveira [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Melchior, Karine [UNESP] Saska, Sybele [UNESP] Coelho, Fernanda [UNESP] Scarel-Caminaga, Raquel Mantuaneli [UNESP] Capote, Ticiana Sidorenko de Oliveira [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Biomaterials/evaluation Bone regeneration Bonefill®/toxicity Hydroxyapatite |
topic |
Biomaterials/evaluation Bone regeneration Bonefill®/toxicity Hydroxyapatite |
description |
Bone substitutes based on hydroxyapatite (HA) and Bonefill® (BO-inorganic bovine bone) associated with poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) (HA/PLGA and BO/PLGA) were evaluated concerning cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity as potential candidates for bone repair. The materials were developed and provided by Bionnovation Biomedical Products Ltda. Eluates from these bone substitutes were prepared for toxicity evaluations using eukaryotic cell cultures. HA/PLGA was used as a comparison for Bonefill®. Cell viability was evaluated by XTT assay and surviving fraction was calculated for clonogenic survival. Additionally, tail moment was used to assess genotoxicity (comet assay). The frequencies of binucleated cells with micronucleus (FBMN), micronucleus (FMN), nucleoplasmic bridges (NPBs), and nuclear buds (NBUDs) were analysed by cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN assay). Results showed no statistical difference in cell viability compared with negative control (NC) The eluates did not promote delayed cytotoxicity whereas the surviving fraction rate for cultured cells was similar to NC. Furthermore, no genotoxicity or mutagenicity effects were observed for cultured cells with the Bonefill/PLGA and HA/PLGA eluates. In conclusion, the negative cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and mutagenicity results indicate that these bone substitutes presented interesting preliminary results as potential biomaterials for bone repair. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-12-11T17:37:53Z 2018-12-11T17:37:53Z 2018-01-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438 Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, v. 54, n. 2, 2018. 2175-9790 1984-8250 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/180070 10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438 S1984-82502018000200611 2-s2.0-85050856017 S1984-82502018000200611.pdf |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/180070 |
identifier_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, v. 54, n. 2, 2018. 2175-9790 1984-8250 10.1590/s2175-97902018000217438 S1984-82502018000200611 2-s2.0-85050856017 S1984-82502018000200611.pdf |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 0,214 0,214 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositoriounesp@unesp.br |
_version_ |
1813546473029107712 |