Effect of highly dispersed graphene and graphene oxide in 3D nanofibrous bacterial cellulose scaffold on cell responses: A comparative study
Effect of highly dispersed graphene and graphene oxide in 3D nanofibrous bacterial cellulose scaffold on cell responses: A comparative study
复制标题
3D纳米纤维细菌纤维素支架中高度分散的石墨烯和氧化石墨烯对细胞反应的影响：比较研究
DOI：
10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.121774
复制
发表时间：
2019-09-01
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Wan, Yizao
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Luo, Honglin;Ao, Haiyong;Wan, Yizao
石墨烯(Ge)和氧化石墨烯(GO)都是很有前途的生物医学应用材料。然而，GO和Ge增强的多孔纳米纤维纳米复合材料支架之间的电池行为的直接比较尚未见报道。在本工作中，首次将GO和Ge分别作为增强体构建了细菌纤维素(BC)基三维(3D)多孔纳米纤维支架。这些纳米复合材料是通过一种名为膜-液界面培养(MLIC)的原位生物合成方法制备的。所制备的纳米复合材料在三维纳米纤维BC中表现出良好的GO和Ge分散性。扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察表明，GO/BC和Ge/BC没有明显的差异，但它们的水接触角和力学性能有所不同。利用小鼠胚胎成骨细胞(MC3T3-E1)进行的细胞研究表明，GO/BC支架比Ge/BC支架具有更好的细胞黏附、铺展和增殖能力，并具有更高的成骨分化能力。结果证实，当GO被引入3D纳米纤维BC基质中时，由于其表面的亲水性，GO可能表现出比Ge更好的电池性能。这些结果表明，GO和Ge的掺入对3D纳米纤维BC支架具有不同的生物学性能，GO/BC支架比Ge/BC支架具有更好的生物相容性和生物活性。
Both graphene (GE) and graphene oxide (GO) are promising materials for biomedical applications. However, direct comparisons on cell behavior between GO and GE reinforced porous nanofibrous nanocomposite scaffolds have not been reported. In this work, for the first time, GO and GE are used separately as reinforcements to construct bacterial cellulose (BC) based three-dimensional (3D) porous nanofibrous scaffolds. These nanocomposites were fabricated through an in situ biosynthesis process named membrane-liquid interface culture (MLIC) method. The as-prepared nanocomposites exhibit well dispersed GO and GE in 3D nanofibrous BC matrix. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observations do not reveal significant differences between GO/BC and GE/BC, while their water contact angles and mechanical properties are different. Cell studies using mouse embryo osteoblast (MC3T3-E1) cells demonstrate that GO/BC scaffold exhibits better cell adhesion, spreading, and proliferation and higher osteogenic differentiation than its GE/BC counterpart. The results confirm that, when incorporated in 3D nanofibrous BC matrix, GO exhibits more favorable cell performance than GE likely due to its hydrophilic surface. These results suggest that GO and GE incorporation provides different biological properties to 3D nanofibrous BC scaffold, and that GO/BC scaffold is more biocompatible and bioactive than GE/BC scaffold.