Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.4
2.2
Journals
Symmetry
Special Issues
Biomaterials and Symmetry
share announcement

Biomaterials and Symmetry

A special issue of Symmetry (ISSN 2073-8994). This special issue belongs to the section "Life Sciences".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2019) | Viewed by 15587

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Piedad N. De Aza

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Instituto de Bioingeniería, Universidad Miguel Hernandez, 03202 Elche Alicante, Spain
Interests: designing and developing new polycrystalline biomaterials (dense and porous) with controlled microstructures; making use of appropriated phase equilibrium diagrams and to study, not only their physical properties, but also their behavior in vitro (stem cells) and in vivo (bioactivity in rats and rabbits); the tissue engineering field study of the tissue–ceramic implant interfaces is of particular interest
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Pablo A. Velasquez

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Institute of Bioengineering, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, Elche, Spain
Interests: surface analysis of biomaterials
Dr. Angel Murciano

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Departamento de Materiales, Óptica y Tecnologia Electrónica, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Avda. Universidad s/n, 03202-Elche, Alicante, Spain
Interests: biomaterial synthesis

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Morphogenesis is the developmental waterfall of pattern formation, body plan establishment, and the architecture of mirror-image bilateral symmetry of many structures, concluding in the adult form. Tissue engineering is the emerging discipline of design and construction of spare parts for the human body to restore function based on principles of molecular developmental biology and morphogenesis governed by bioengineering. The three main ingredients for both morphogenesis and tissue engineering are inductive signals, responding cells, and the extracellular matrix. Among the many tissues in the human body, bone has considerable powerful for regeneration and is a prototype model for tissue engineering based on morphogenesis.

Properties of biomaterials and scaffolds, such as pore structures, mechanical properties and degradation, play an essential role in accomplishment of their functions for tissue repairing or regeneration. Surface characteristics of biomaterials, whether their topography, chemistry or surface energy, play an essential part in cell–material interactions and implant integration.

It is, therefore, my immense pleasure to invite you to submit a manuscript for this Special Issue, “Biomaterials and Symmetry”. Full research articles, short communications and comprehensive review papers covering all aspects of biomaterials design, tissue engineering, and applications of biomaterials, but not limited to them, are welcome.

Prof. Dr. Piedad N. De Aza
Dr. Pablo A. Velasquez
Dr. Angel Murciano
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Symmetry is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Computer Design
  • Scaffolds
  • Bone graft biomaterials
  • Tissue Engineering
  • Cell–material interaction
  • Bone tissue-material interaction
  • Processing
  • Applications
  • Biocompatibility
  • Biodegradation

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

13 pages, 5424 KiB  
Article
Histological and Histomorphometric Analyses of Two Bovine Bone Blocks Implanted in Rabbit Calvaria
by Sergio Alexandre Gehrke, Patricia Mazón, Massimo Del Fabbro, Margherita Tumedei, Jaime Aramburú Júnior, Leticia Pérez-Díaz and Piedad N. De Aza
Symmetry 2019, 11(5), 641; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11050641 - 7 May 2019
Cited by 25 | Viewed by 3355
Abstract
This study compared the osteogenic potential of two types of bovine bone blocks. Blocks were obtained by either sintered or a nonsintered process. Calvaria were surgically exposed in 20 rabbits. In each animal, six 0.5-mm-diameter cortical microperforations were drilled with a carbide bur [...] Read more.
This study compared the osteogenic potential of two types of bovine bone blocks. Blocks were obtained by either sintered or a nonsintered process. Calvaria were surgically exposed in 20 rabbits. In each animal, six 0.5-mm-diameter cortical microperforations were drilled with a carbide bur before grafting to promote graft irrigation. The sintered (group 1) and nonsintered (group 2) bovine bone blocks (6 mm diameter, 5 mm high) were bilaterally screwed onto calvarial bone. Blocks were previously prepared from a larger block using a trephine bur. Rabbits were sacrificed after 6 and 8 weeks for the histological and histomorphometric analyses. Samples were processed using the historesin technique. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of the newly formed bone were undertaken using light microscopy. Both groups showed modest new bone formation and remodeling. At the 8-week follow-up, the sintered group displayed significantly lower bone resorption (average of 10% in group 1 and 25% in group 2) and neo-formation (12.86 ± 1.52%) compared to the nonsintered group (16.10 ± 1.29%) at both follow-ups (p < 0.05). One limitation of the present animal model is that the study demonstrates that variations in the physico-chemical properties of the bone substitute material clearly influence the in vivo behavior. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials and Symmetry)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 5517 KiB  
Article
In Vitro Bioactivity and Cell Biocompatibility of a Hypereutectic Bioceramic
by Patricia Mazón, Patricia Ros-Tárraga, Sara Serena, Luis Meseguer-Olmo and Piedad N. De Aza
Symmetry 2019, 11(3), 355; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11030355 - 8 Mar 2019
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2756
Abstract
Two dense biphasic ceramics, with a hypereutectic composition of 30 wt % CaSiO3–70 wt % Ca3(PO4)2, were synthesized by a solid-state reaction of homogeneous pressed combinations of previously synthesized synthetic CaSiO3 and Ca3 [...] Read more.
Two dense biphasic ceramics, with a hypereutectic composition of 30 wt % CaSiO3–70 wt % Ca3(PO4)2, were synthesized by a solid-state reaction of homogeneous pressed combinations of previously synthesized synthetic CaSiO3 and Ca3(PO4)2 powders. The objective was to produce a dense structure to generate large enough in situ pores for the ceramic to be used in tissue engineering. To develop such a structure, two grain sizes of CaSiO3 were used (63–100 µm and 100–150 μm) and some of their properties were studied in vitro, as they are relevant for tissue engineering. X-ray diffraction analysis, μ-Raman spectroscopy, diametrical compression test, and scanning electron microscopy with elemental mapping showed a coarse-grained homogeneous microstructure for the materials, which consisted of wollastonite (α-CaSiO3) and tricalcium phosphate (α-Ca3(PO4)2), with adequate mechanical properties for implantation. In vitro bioactivity was evaluated in simulated body fluid (SBF) by exploring a hydroxyapatite (HA)-like formation. The results showed that tricalcium phosphate grains dissolved more preferentially than those of wollastonite, but not fast enough to leave a pore before the surface was coated with an HA-like layer after soaking only for three days. Biocompatibility was evaluated by in vitro cell experiments, which showed cell proliferation, adhesion, and spreading on the ceramic surface. This ceramic is expected to be used as a bone graft substitute. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials and Symmetry)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2300 KiB  
Article
The Role of Strontium Enriched Hydroxyapatite and Tricalcium Phosphate Biomaterials in Osteoporotic Bone Regeneration
by Janis Zarins, Mara Pilmane, Elga Sidhoma, Ilze Salma and Janis Locs
Symmetry 2019, 11(2), 229; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020229 - 14 Feb 2019
Cited by 20 | Viewed by 3926
Abstract
Background: Strontium (Sr) enriched biomaterials have been used to improve bone regeneration in vivo. However, most studies provide only two experimental groups. The aim of our study was to compare eleven different bone sample groups from osteoporotic and healthy rabbits’ femoral neck, as [...] Read more.
Background: Strontium (Sr) enriched biomaterials have been used to improve bone regeneration in vivo. However, most studies provide only two experimental groups. The aim of our study was to compare eleven different bone sample groups from osteoporotic and healthy rabbits’ femoral neck, as it is the most frequent osteoporotic fracture in humans. Methods: Osteoporotic bone defects were filled with hydroxyapatite 30% (HA) and tricalcium phosphate 70% (TCP), 5% Sr-enriched HA30/TCP70, HA70/TCP30, or Sr-HA70/TCP30 granules and were compared with intact leg, sham surgery and healthy non-operated bone. Expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG), nuclear factor kappa beta 105 (NFkB-105), osteocalcin (OC), bone morphogenetic protein 2/4 (BMP-2/4), collagen I (Col-1α), matrix metalloproteinase 2 (MMP-2), tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 2 (TIMP-2), interleukin 1 (IL-1) and interleukin 10 (IL-10) was analyzed by histomorphometry and immunohistochemistry. Results: Our study showed that Sr-HA70/TCP30 induced higher expression of all above-mentioned factors compared to intact leg and even higher expression of OC, MMP-2 and NFkB-105 compared to Sr-HA30/TCP70. HA70/TCP30 induced higher level of NFkB-105 and IL-1 compared to HA30/TCP70. Conclusion: Sr-enriched biomaterials improved bone regeneration at molecular level in severe osteoporosis and induced activity of the factors was higher than after pure ceramic, sham or even healthy rabbits. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials and Symmetry)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 5848 KiB  
Article
Use of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate (BMAC) Associated with Hyperbaric Oxygenation Therapy in Maxillary Appositional Bone Reconstruction. A Randomized Clinical Trial
by Antonio Carlos Aloise, Paulo Pasquali, Marcelo Sperandio, Luis Guilherme Scavone de Macedo, Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira, André Antonio Pelegrine and José Luis Calvo-Guirado
Symmetry 2018, 10(10), 533; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10100533 - 22 Oct 2018
Viewed by 4872
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate bone reconstruction using xenograft alone and associated with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Material and Methods: Twenty-four maxillary edentulous patients were randomly assigned into three groups: Control group (CG)—xenograft bone [...] Read more.
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate bone reconstruction using xenograft alone and associated with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Material and Methods: Twenty-four maxillary edentulous patients were randomly assigned into three groups: Control group (CG)—xenograft bone alone (n = 8); Group 1 (G1)—xenogeneic bone block combined with BMAC (n = 8), and Group 2 (G2)—xenogeneic bone block combined with BMAC and hyperbaric oxygenation (n = 8). Bone biopsies were harvested 6 months after grafting. Vital Mineralized Tissue (VMT), Non-vital Mineralized Tissue (NVMT), and Non-Mineralized Tissue (NMT) were measured. Computed tomography was also performed on three occasions T0 (preoperative), T4 (4 months postoperative), and T8 (8 months postoperative). The difference between T4 and T8 values with respect to T0 was used to determine the thickness level gain after 4 and 8 months, respectively. Results: The tomographic evaluation did not show significant differences between the groups either at 4 or at the 8 months postoperatively. Regarding the histomorphometric analysis, CG had the lowest percentages of VMT (36.58 ± 9.56%), whereas G1 and G2 had similar results (55.64 ± 2.83% and 55.30 ± 1.41%, respectively). Concerning NMT and NVMT levels, the opposite was observed, with CG levels of 51.21 ± 11.54% and 11.16 ± 2.37%, G1 of 39.76 ± 11.48% and 3.65 ± 0.87%, and G2 of 40.3 ± 11.48% and 4.10 ± 0.87%, respectively. Conclusions: The use of bone block xenograft associated with BMAC resulted in a significant increase of bone neoformation when compared to the xenograft alone, though hyperbaric oxygenation did not enhance the results. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials and Symmetry)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop