Biocompatibility of novel polymer‐apatite nanocomposite fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the basis of the bioactivity of hydroxyapatite (HA) and the excellent mechanical and biocompatible performance of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), composite microfibers made of nanograde HA with PET was designed and fabricated to mimic the structure of biological bone, which exhibits a composite of nanograde apatite crystals and natural polymer. The PET/HA nanocomposite was molded into fibers so that the bulk structures' mechanical properties can be custom tailored by changing the final 3D orientation of the fibbers. This study focused on the in vitro biocompatibility evaluation of the PET/HA composite fibers as potential bone fixation biomaterial for total hip replacement prosthesis surfaces. The MTT assay was performed with the extracts of the composite fibers in order to evaluate the short-term effects of the degradation products. The cell morphology of L929 mouse fibroblast cell line was analyzed after direct contact with the fiber scaffolds for different time periods, and the cell viability was also analyzed by the Alamar Blue assay. The release of the inflammatory cytokine, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), from RAW 264.7 macrophages in the presence of fiber extracts and fibers was used as a measure of the inflammatory response. The ability of the fiber matrices to support L929 attachment, spreading, and growth in vitro, combined with the compatible degradation extracts and low inflammation potential of the fibers and extracts, suggests potential use of these fibers as load-baring bone fixation biomaterial structures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".