Silicon-Substituted Hydroxyapatite Particles and Response of Adipose Stem Cells In Vitro

  • M. Eatemad
  • S. LabbafEmail author
  • A. Baharlou Houreh
  • M. H. Nasr Esfahani


Due to the similarity of synthetic hydroxyapatite (HA) to natural bone tissue, but, because of its low degradation rate, the current study focuses on silicon-substituted HA (Si-HA) synthesis, characterization, and biological evaluations. Si-HA was successfully prepared through sol-gel processing route and characterized using SEM, EDX, XRD, and FTIR. Si-HA particles were found to be non-cytotoxic following exposure to adipose stem cells (ADSCs). In fact, Si-HA particles showed a high level of matrix mineralization following prolonged and continuous exposure to ADSCs. It is suggested that the incorporation of Si in HA structure positively affects cellular behavior, associated with a higher degradation rate, and subsequently greater level of ionic product release from Si-HA particles.

Lay Summary

Hydroxyapatite (HA) has long been applied as bone substitutes but its low degradation rate limits its application. One approach is the incorporation of silicon (Si) within HA structure. This study confirms that Si-substituted HA enhance stem cell proliferation and promote osteogenic differentiation. Hence, Si-HA could be utilized in composites, scaffolds, and coatings for bone-related disorders.


Si-HA particles Bone tissue engineering Adipose stem cells 



  1. 1.
    Olszta MJ, Cheng X, Jee SS, Kumar R, Kim Y-Y, Kaufman MJ, et al. Bone structure and formation: a new perspective. Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports. 2007;58:77–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sobczak-Kupiec A, Pluta K, Drabczyk A, Włoś M, Tyliszczak B. Synthesis and characterization of ceramic-polymer composites containing bioactive synthetic hydroxyapatite for biomedical applications. Ceram Int. 2018;44:13630–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kolmas J, Krukowski S, Laskus A, Jurkitewicz M. Synthetic hydroxyapatite in pharmaceutical applications. Ceram Int. 2016;42:2472–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tracy BM, Doremus R. Direct electron microscopy studies of the bone—hydroxylapatite interface. J Biomed Mater Res. 1984;18:719–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hellmich C, Ulm F-J. Average hydroxyapatite concentration is uniform in the extracollagenous ultrastructure of mineralized tissues: evidence at the 1–10-μm scale. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2003;2:21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weiner S, Wagner HD. The material bone: structure-mechanical function relations. Annu Rev Mater Sci. 1998;28:271–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Poinern GE, Brundavanam RK, Mondinos N, Jiang Z-T. Synthesis and characterisation of nanohydroxyapatite using an ultrasound assisted method. Ultrason Sonochem. 2009;16:469–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Bruijn J, Van Blitterswijk C, Davies J. Initial bone matrix formation at the hydroxyapatite interface in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995;29:89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Radin S, Ducheyne P. The effect of calcium phosphate ceramic composition and structure on in vitro behavior. II. Precipitation. J Biomed Mater Res. 1993;27:35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Patel N, Best S, Bonfield W, Gibson IR, Hing K, Damien E, et al. A comparative study on the in vivo behavior of hydroxyapatite and silicon substituted hydroxyapatite granules. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2002;13:1199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Höland W, Vogel W, Naumann K, Gummel J. Interface reactions between machinable bioactive glass-ceramics and bone. J Biomed Mater Res. 1985;19:303–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Webster TJ, Ergun C, Doremus RH, Bizios R. Hydroxylapatite with substituted magnesium, zinc, cadmium, and yttrium. II. Mechanisms of osteoblast adhesion. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;59:312–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hutmacher DW, Schantz JT, Lam CXF, Tan KC, Lim TC. State of the art and future directions of scaffold-based bone engineering from a biomaterials perspective. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1:245–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gibson I, Best S, Bonfield W. Chemical characterization of silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999;44:422–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carlisle EM. Silicon: a possible factor in bone calcification. Science. 1970;167:279–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    El Yacoubi A, Massit A, Fathi M, El Idrissi BC, Yamni K. Characterization of silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite powders synthesized by a wet precipitation method. IOSR J Appl Chem. 2014;7:24–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moheet IA, Luddin N, Ab Rahman I, Kannan TP, Ghani NRNA. Evaluation of mechanical properties and bond strength of nano-hydroxyapatite-silica added glass ionomer cement. Ceram Int. 2018;44:9899–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hijón N, Cabanas MV, Pena J, Vallet-Regí M. Dip coated silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite films. Acta Biomater. 2006;2(2):567–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Latifi S, Fathi M, Golozar M. Preparation and characterisation of bioactive hydroxyapatite–silica composite nanopowders via sol–gel method for medical applications. Adv Appl Ceram. 2011;110:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim HW, Kim HE, Salih V, Knowles JC. Hydroxyapatite and titania sol–gel composite coatings on titanium for hard tissue implants; mechanical and in vitro biological performance. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2005;72:1–8.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andersson J, Areva S, Spliethoff B, Lindén M. Sol–gel synthesis of a multifunctional, hierarchically porous silica/apatite composite. Biomaterials. 2005;26:6827–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malakauskaite-Petruleviciene M, Stankeviciute Z, Niaura G, Prichodko A, Kareiva A. Synthesis and characterization of sol–gel derived calcium hydroxyapatite thin films spin-coated on silicon substrate. Ceram Int. 2015;41:7421–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zuk PA, Zhu M, Ashjian P, De Ugarte DA, Huang JI, Mizuno H, et al. Human adipose tissue is a source of multipotent stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2002;13:4279–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alabdulkarim Y, Ghalimah B, Al-Otaibi M, Al-Jallad HF, Mekhael M, Willie B, et al. Recent advances in bone regeneration: the role of adipose tissue-derived stromal vascular fraction and mesenchymal stem cells. J Limb Lengthen Reconstr. 2017;3:4.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reumann MK, Linnemann C, Aspera-Werz RH, Arnold S, Held M, Seeliger C, et al. Donor site location is critical for proliferation, stem cell capacity, and osteogenic differentiation of adipose mesenchymal stem/stromal cells: implications for bone tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beigi MH, Atefi A, Ghanaei HR, Labbaf S, Ejeian F, Nasr-Esfahani MH. Activated platelet-rich plasma improves cartilage regeneration using adipose stem cells encapsulated in a 3D alginate scaffold. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2018;12:1327–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Milner DJ, Bionaz M, Monaco E, Cameron JA, Wheeler MB. Myogenic potential of mesenchymal stem cells isolated from porcine adipose tissue. Cell Tissue Res. 2018;372:507–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang Y-H, Wu J-Y, Kong SC, Chiang M-H, Ho M-L, Yeh M-L, et al. Low power laser irradiation and human adipose-derived stem cell treatments promote bone regeneration in critical-sized calvarial defects in rats. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0195337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Houreh AB, Labbaf S, Ting H-K, Ejeian F, Jones JR, Esfahani M-HN. Influence of calcium and phosphorus release from bioactive glasses on viability and differentiation of dental pulp stem cells. J Mater Sci. 2017;52:8928–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gholami S, Labbaf S, Houreh AB, Ting H-K, Jones JR, Esfahani M-HN. Long term effects of bioactive glass particulates on dental pulp stem cells in vitro. Biomedical Glasses. 2017;3:96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Miron R, Hedbom E, Saulacic N, Zhang Y, Sculean A, Bosshardt D, et al. Osteogenic potential of autogenous bone grafts harvested with four different surgical techniques. J Dent Res. 2011;90:1428–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Porter AE, Patel N, Skepper JN, Best SM, Bonfield W. Effect of sintered silicate-substituted hydroxyapatite on remodelling processes at the bone–implant interface. Biomaterials. 2004;25:3303–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bang L, Long B, Othman R. Carbonate hydroxyapatite and silicon-substituted carbonate hydroxyapatite: synthesis, mechanical properties, and solubility evaluations. Sci World J. 2014:2014.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Porter AE, Botelho CM, Lopes MA, Santos JD, Best SM, Bonfield W. Ultrastructural comparison of dissolution and apatite precipitation on hydroxyapatite and silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite in vitro and in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2004;69:670–9.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bianco A, Cacciotti I, Lombardi M, Montanaro L. Si-substituted hydroxyapatite nanopowders: synthesis, thermal stability and sinterability. Mater Res Bull. 2009;44:345–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Arcos D, Rodrı́guez-Carvajal J, Vallet-Regı́ M. The effect of the silicon incorporation on the hydroxylapatite structure. A neutron diffraction study. Solid State Sci. 2004;6:987–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zheng Y, Dong G, Deng C. Effect of silicon content on the surface morphology of silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite bio-ceramics treated by a hydrothermal vapor method. Ceram Int. 2014;40:14661–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Aminian A, Solati-Hashjin M, Samadikuchaksaraei A, Bakhshi F, Gorjipour F, Farzadi A, et al. Synthesis of silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite by a hydrothermal method with two different phosphorous sources. Ceram Int. 2011;37:1219–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dong G, He L, Pang D, Wei L, Deng C. An in situ study of the deposition of a calcium phosphate mineralized layer on a silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite sensor modulated by bovine serum albumin using QCM-D technology. Ceram Int. 2016;42:18648–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bang L, Ishikawa K, Othman R. Effect of silicon and heat-treatment temperature on the morphology and mechanical properties of silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite. Ceram Int. 2011;37:3637–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Porter AE. Nanoscale characterization of the interface between bone and hydroxyapatite implants and the effect of silicon on bone apposition. Micron. 2006;37:681–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Porter AE, Best SM, Bonfield W. Ultrastructural comparison of hydroxyapatite and silicon-substituted hydroxyapatite for biomedical applications. Biomed Mater Res A. 2004;68:133–41.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Maeno S, Niki Y, Matsumoto H, Morioka H, Yatabe T, Funayama A, et al. The effect of calcium ion concentration on osteoblast viability, proliferation and differentiation in monolayer and 3D culture. Biomaterials. 2005;26:4847–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Marie PJ. The calcium-sensing receptor in bone cells: a potential therapeutic target in osteoporosis. Bone. 2010;46:571–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Regenerative Engineering Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran
  2. 2.Department of Cellular Biotechnology, Cell Science Research CenterRoyan Institute for Biotechnology, ACECRIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations