Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 May;4(5):70-7.
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.45.2000382.

Biocompatibility of single-walled carbon nanotube composites for bone regeneration

Affiliations

Biocompatibility of single-walled carbon nanotube composites for bone regeneration

A Gupta et al. Bone Joint Res. 2015 May.

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vivo biocompatibility of novel single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) composites for applications in bone and tissue regeneration.

Methods: A total of 60 Sprague-Dawley rats (125 g to 149 g) were implanted subcutaneously with SWCNT/PLAGA composites (10 mg SWCNT and 1gm PLAGA 12 mm diameter two-dimensional disks), and at two, four, eight and 12 weeks post-implantation were compared with control (Sham) and PLAGA (five rats per group/point in time). Rats were observed for signs of morbidity, overt toxicity, weight gain and food consumption, while haematology, urinalysis and histopathology were completed when the animals were killed.

Results: No mortality and clinical signs were observed. All groups showed consistent weight gain, and the rate of gain for each group was similar. All groups exhibited a similar pattern for food consumption. No difference in urinalysis, haematology, and absolute and relative organ weight was observed. A mild to moderate increase in the summary toxicity (sumtox) score was observed for PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA implanted animals, whereas the control animals did not show any response. Both PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA showed a significantly higher sumtox score compared with the control group at all time intervals. However, there was no significant difference between PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA groups.

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that SWCNT/PLAGA composites exhibited in vivo biocompatibility similar to the Food and Drug Administration approved biocompatible polymer, PLAGA, over a period of 12 weeks. These results showed potential of SWCNT/PLAGA composites for bone regeneration as the low percentage of SWCNT did not elicit a localised or general overt toxicity. Following the 12-week exposure, the material was considered to have an acceptable biocompatibility to warrant further long-term and more invasive in vivo studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2015;4:70-7.

Keywords: Biocompatibility; Bone regeneration; Bone tissue engineering; Carbon nanotubes; SWCNT/PLAGA composites.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

ICMJE Conflict of Interest:None declared

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic representation of the surgical procedure involved in subcutaneous implantation of sham, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA composites in the rat.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Graph showing the changes in body weight in rats implanted with Sham, poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA composites. Data represent mean with standard error of the mean, and p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Graph showing the food consumption in rats implanted with Sham, poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA composites at 12 weeks post-implantation. Data represent mean with standard error of the mean and p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Graphs showing white blood cell differential count of rats implanted with Sham, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA composites. The parameters include segmented neutrophils, immature neutrophils, lymphocyte, monocyte, eosinophil and basophil. Data represent mean with standard error of the mean and p < 0.05 was considered significant (PLAGA was significantly different from Sham).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Gross pathological images of subcutaneous tissue surrounding the implants (Sham, poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes; SWCNT/PLAGA) at eight and 12 weeks post-implantation. All incision sites were healed and the tissue surrounding the implants appeared grossly normal, with no overt evidence of inflammation.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Graphs showing the relative organ weight in rats implanted with Sham, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA composites. The parameters include adrenal glands, lungs, spleen, heart, liver and kidneys. Data represent mean with standard error of the mean and p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Micrograph of subcutaneous skin tissues of rats implanted with Sham, poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA at two, four, eight and 12 weeks post-implantation stained with haematoxylin and eosin (×20 magnification). C, composite (PLAGA or SWCNT/PLAGA) implant site; M, muscular tissue; N, polymorphonuclear neutrophils; Fp, fibroplasia; Fb, fibrosis.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Graph showing the histopathological changes to Sham, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLAGA) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT)/PLAGA in rat subcutaneous tissue as a function of the summary toxicity score on a scale of 0 to 44 over a period of 12 weeks post-implantation. Data represent mean with standard error of the mean and p < 0.05 was considered significant. PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA were significantly different from Sham; both PLAGA and SWCNT/PLAGA showed significant decrease from week two to week four.

References

    1. Borrelli J Jr, Prickett WD, Ricci WM. Treatment of nonunions and osseous defects with bone graft and calcium sulfate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003;411:245–254. - PubMed
    1. Giannoudis PV, Dinopoulos H, Tsiridis E. Bone substitutes: an update. Injury 2005;36(Suppl 3):S20–S27. - PubMed
    1. Korompilias AV, Lykissas MG, Soucacos PN, Kostas I, Beris AE. Vascularized free fibular bone graft in the management of congenital tibial pseudarthrosis. Microsurgery 2009;29:346–352. - PubMed
    1. Soucacos PN, Johnson EO, Babis G. An update on recent advances in bone regeneration. Injury 2008;39(suppl 2):S1–S4. - PubMed
    1. Petite H, Viateau V, Bensaïd W, et al. Tissue-engineered bone regeneration. Nat Biotechnol 2000;18:959–963. - PubMed