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 Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

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 annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Titanium has an osseointegrative property, while hydroxyapatite has an osteoconductive property. It remains a matter of controversy among researchers whether hydroxyapatite has higher osteoblast compatibility than titanium. Here, we compared the activities between osteoblasts cultured on titanium and those cultured on hydroxyapatite. An osteoblast-like cell line, MC3T3-E1, was cultured on machined titanium, evaporated titanium, and hydroxyapatite disks to compare the affinity of osteoblasts to each of these materials. The adhesion and proliferation of MC3T3-E1 cells were higher on hydroxyapatite disks than on the other disks. Osteoblast differentiation was not affected by the nature of disks investigated, but calcium was more easily deposited on the hydroxyapatite disks. The amount of absorbed serum proteins detected on hydroxyapatite was greater than that on titanium. In conclusion, our results indicate hydroxyapatite is a more suitable material for osteoblast growth than titanium because of its higher absorption of serum proteins.

Osteoblast compatibility of materials depends on serum protein absorbability in osteogenesis