English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Cryogels represent ideal carriers for bone tissue engineering. We recently described the osteogenic potential of cryogels with different protein additives, e.g., platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, these scaffolds raised concerns as different toxic substances are required for their preparation. Therefore, we developed another gelatin (GEL)-based cryogel. This study aimed to compare the two scaffolds regarding their physical characteristics and their influence on osteogenic and osteoclastic cells. Compared to the PRP scaffolds, GEL scaffolds had both larger pores and thicker walls, resulting in a lower connective density. PRP scaffolds, with crystalized calcium phosphates on the surface, were significantly stiffer but less mineralized than GEL scaffolds with hydroxyapatite incorporated within the matrix. The GEL scaffolds favored adherence and proliferation of the osteogenic SCP-1 and SaOS-2 cells. Macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) levels seemed to be induced by GEL scaffolds. Levels of other osteoblast and osteoclast markers were comparable between the two scaffolds. After 14 days, mineral content and stiffness of the cryogels were increased by SCP-1 and SaOS-2 cells, especially of PRP scaffolds. THP-1 cell-derived osteoclastic cells only reduced mineral content and stiffness of PRP cryogels. In summary, both scaffolds present powerful advantages; however, the possibility to altered mineral content and stiffness may be decisive when it comes to using PRP or GEL scaffolds for bone tissue engineering.

Material-Dependent Formation and Degradation of Bone Matrix—Comparison of Two Cryogels