摘要
AIM: To improve osteogenic differentiation and attachment of cells.METHODS: An electronic search was conducted inPub Med from January 2004 to December 2013. Studies which performed smart modifications on conventional bone scaffold materials were included. Scaffolds with controlled release or encapsulation of bioactive molecules were not included. Experiments which did not investigate response of cells toward the scaffold(cell attachment, proliferation or osteoblastic differentiation) were excluded. RESULTS: Among 1458 studies, 38 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main scaffold varied extensively among the included studies. Smart modifications included addition of growth factors(group Ⅰ-11 studies), extracellular matrix-like molecules(group Ⅱ-13 studies) and nanoparticles(nano-HA)(group Ⅲ-17 studies). In all groups, surface coating was the most commonly applied approach for smart modification of scaffolds. In group I, bone morphogenetic proteins were mainly used as growth factor stabilized on polycaprolactone(PCL). In group Ⅱ, collagen 1 in combination with PCL, hydroxyapatite(HA) and tricalcium phosphate were the most frequent scaffolds used. In the third group, nano-HA with PCL and chitosan were used the most. As variable methods were used, a thorough and comprehensible compare between the results and approaches was unattainable.CONCLUSION: Regarding the variability in methodology of these in vitro studies it was demonstrated that smart modification of scaffolds can improve tissue properties.
AIM To improve osteogenic differentiation and attachmentof cells.METHODS： An electronic search was conducted inPubMed from January 2004 to December 2013. Studieswhich performed smart modifications on conventionalbone scaffold materials were included. Scaffoldswith controlled release or encapsulation of bioactivemolecules were not included. Experiments which did notinvestigate response of cells toward the scaffold （cellattachment, proliferation or osteoblastic differentiation）were excluded.RESULTS： Among 1458 studies, 38 met the inclusion andexclusion criteria. The main scaffold varied extensivelyamong the included studies. Smart modificationsincluded addition of growth factors （group Ⅰ-11 studies）,extracellular matrix-like molecules （group Ⅱ-13 studies）and nanoparticles （nano-HA） （group Ⅲ-17 studies）. In allgroups, surface coating was the most commonly appliedapproach for smart modification of scaffolds. In group I,bone morphogenetic proteins were mainly used as growthfactor stabilized on polycaprolactone （PCL）. In groupⅡ, collagen 1 in combination with PCL, hydroxyapatite（HA） and tricalcium phosphate were the most frequentscaffolds used. In the third group, nano-HA with PCL andchitosan were used the most. As variable methods wereused, a thorough and comprehensible compare betweenthe results and approaches was unattainable.CONCLUSION： Regarding the variability in methodologyof these in vitro studies it was demonstrated that smartmodification of scaffolds can improve tissue properties.
