materials-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Materials for Hard Tissue Repair and Regeneration (Third Volume)

A special issue of Materials (ISSN 1996-1944). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomaterials".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 20 November 2024 | Viewed by 1712

Special Issue Editors

Department of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama 700-8525, Japan
Interests: tissue engineering; biomaterials; tumorigenesis; bone formation; regenerative medicine
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Department of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama 700-8525, Japan
Interests: histopathology; biomaterials; tumor microenvironment; regenerative medicine; material science
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

After our successful first two volume of the Special Issue “Materials for Hard Tissue Repair and Regeneration”, we have decided to create the 3rd volume, in order to collect and publish a series of state-of-art research in the field of materials for hard tissue repair and regeneration.

This 3rd volume of Special Issue, like the first two ones, covers a wide range of biomaterials for medical application. Biomaterials are not only inanimate matter, but also cells and extracellular matrix, and even living tissues themselves are now treated as "biomaterials”. In fact, these biomaterials are increasingly being used for tissue regeneration and repair, as well as for the treatment of various diseases that require biomaterials. Against this background, it is necessary to study the interaction between various biomaterials and living organisms and the application, use, development, and evaluation of biomaterials from various academic disciplines. Artificial intelligence has also begun to be used to evaluate biomaterials. This Special Issue focuses on biomaterials in a broad sense used in tissue repair and regeneration processes and in the treatment of diseases and introduces their biological responses, material properties, fabrication methods, and evaluation methods. We invite submissions of reviews and original papers on recent developments in related fields.

Dr. Keisuke Nakano
Dr. Kiyofumi Takabatake
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • biomaterials
  • tissue regeneration
  • tissue repair
  • tissue interaction
  • biocompatibility
  • medical
  • dental

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

14 pages, 1636 KiB  
Article
Influence of Specimen Dimension, Water Immersion Protocol, and Surface Roughness on Water Sorption and Solubility of Resin-Based Restorative Materials
Materials 2024, 17(5), 984; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17050984 - 21 Feb 2024
Viewed by 341
Abstract
The evaluation of water sorption and solubility is pivotal for the development of new resin-based restorative materials with the potential for clinical application. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the influence of the specimen dimension, water immersion protocol, and surface [...] Read more.
The evaluation of water sorption and solubility is pivotal for the development of new resin-based restorative materials with the potential for clinical application. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the influence of the specimen dimension, water immersion protocol, and surface roughness on the water sorption and solubility of three resin-based restorative materials. Disk-shaped specimens of 15 mm × 1 mm, 10 mm × 1 mm, and 6 mm × 1 mm were produced with a composite resin (Z100), a resin cement (RelyX ARC), and an adhesive system (Single Bond 2—SB2). The specimens were immersed in distilled water according to four protocols: ISO (all the specimens for each group were vertically immersed in 50 mL); IV-10 (the specimens were individually and vertically immersed in 10 mL); IH-10 (the specimens were individually and horizontally immersed in 10 mL); and IH-2 (the specimens were individually and horizontally immersed in 2 mL). The surface roughness (Sa and Sp) was evaluated using an atomic force microscope, and the degree of conversion was determined using FT-IR spectrometry. The specimen dimension and water immersion protocol had no effect on water sorption and solubility. For the three resin-based restorative materials, Sp was higher than Sa. The degree of conversion was not influenced by the specimen dimension. The variations in the specimen dimension and water immersion protocol compared to those determined by ISO 4049 did not prevent the comparison between the values of water sorption and solubility obtained for a given resin-based restorative material. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Materials for Hard Tissue Repair and Regeneration (Third Volume))
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1833 KiB  
Communication
bmp-2 Gene-Transferred Skeletal Muscles with Needle-Type Electrodes as Efficient and Reliable Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
Materials 2024, 17(4), 880; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17040880 - 14 Feb 2024
Viewed by 375
Abstract
Background: Bone morphogenetic protein-2 (bmp-2) has a high potential to induce bone tissue formation in skeletal muscles. We developed a bone induction system in skeletal muscles using the bmp-2 gene through in vivo electroporation. Natural bone tissues with skeletal muscles can [...] Read more.
Background: Bone morphogenetic protein-2 (bmp-2) has a high potential to induce bone tissue formation in skeletal muscles. We developed a bone induction system in skeletal muscles using the bmp-2 gene through in vivo electroporation. Natural bone tissues with skeletal muscles can be considered potential candidates for biomaterials. However, our previous system using plate-type electrodes did not achieve a 100% success rate in inducing bone tissues in skeletal muscles. In this study, we aimed to enhance the efficiency of bone tissue formation in skeletal muscles by using a non-viral bmp-2 gene expression plasmid vector (pCAGGS-bmp-2) and needle-type electrodes. Methods: We injected the bmp-2 gene with pCAGGS-bmp-2 into the skeletal muscles of rats’ legs and immediately placed needle-type electrodes there. Skeletal tissues were then observed on the 21st day after gene transfer using soft X-ray and histological analyses. Results: The use of needle-type electrodes resulted in a 100% success rate in inducing bone tissues in skeletal muscles. In contrast, the plate-type electrodes only exhibited a 33% success rate. Thus, needle-type electrodes can be more efficient and reliable for transferring the bmp-2 gene to skeletal muscles, making them potential biomaterials for repairing bone defects. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Materials for Hard Tissue Repair and Regeneration (Third Volume))
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 3239 KiB  
Article
The Influence of Adhesive Strategy, Type of Dental Composite, and Polishing Time on Marginal Gap Formation in Class I-like Cavities
Materials 2023, 16(23), 7411; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16237411 - 29 Nov 2023
Viewed by 528
Abstract
Even after more than six decades of dental composite invention (1962), there is still controversial information about the time in which composite restorations should be polished in order to avoid marginal gap formation at the tooth–composite interface. The aim of the present study [...] Read more.
Even after more than six decades of dental composite invention (1962), there is still controversial information about the time in which composite restorations should be polished in order to avoid marginal gap formation at the tooth–composite interface. The aim of the present study was to analyze the influence of adhesive strategy, the type of dental composite, and polishing time on marginal gap formation (%MG) at the tooth–composite interface. Class I-like cavities were hybridized with a universal adhesive system (Single Bond Universal) through two strategies: selective enamel etching (SEE) or self-etching mode (SEM). Cavities were filled with two types of dental composites: nanofilled (Z350) or bulk fill (Filtek One Bulk Fill—ONE), and polishing was performed immediately or delayed for 7 days (n = 5). %MG was evaluated by using a 3D laser confocal microscope. As flexural modulus (FM) and degree of conversion (DC%) are determinants of marginal integrity in dental composite restorations, these properties were evaluated for both composites. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (α = 0.05). Cavities hybridized following the SEE strategy presented lower %MG (p < 0.05). Z350 showed higher %MG than ONE (p < 0.05). There was no difference in %MG between the polishing times when the SEE strategy was used (p > 0.05). Z350 presented higher FM than ONE (p < 0.05). DC% was found to be not significant (p > 0.05). The results suggest that selective enamel etching (SEE) is a better strategy for producing less %MG in composite restorations with enamel margins irrespective of the time in which the restoration is polished. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Materials for Hard Tissue Repair and Regeneration (Third Volume))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop