Bioglass 45S5 doped with Bi2O3 for medical use

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Bioglass 45S5 was doped with bismuth oxide in concentrations up to 40 wt.%. The amorphous nature of the synthesized glasses was confirmed by X-ray phase analysis. The influence of Bi2O3 on the properties of bioglass was studied. In a series of samples containing from 0 to 40 wt.% bismuth oxide, their characteristics change as follows: the pH values of the model medium during glass leaching decrease from 7.84 to 7.46; radiopacity increases from 1150 HU to values exceeding 11000 HU; chemical degradation drops from 1.299% to 0.424%; bioactivity decreases in the range of 0 – 10 wt.% and is absent in the range of 20–40 wt.% Bi2O3. Glasses containing up to 10 wt.% Bi2O3 can find application in reconstructive surgery. They have radiopaque and bioactive properties. Glasses containing 20–40 wt.% Bi2O3 have high radiopacity, chemical resistance, and a slight effect on the pH of the medium when dissolved. They may be promising as radiomodifiers in the treatment of malignant neoplasms using radiation therapy.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

D. N. Grishchenko

Institute of Chemistry, Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: grishchenko@ich.dvo.ru
Russian Federation, Vladivostok, 690022

М. A. Medkov

Institute of Chemistry, Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: grishchenko@ich.dvo.ru
Russian Federation, Vladivostok, 690022

References

  1. Hench L.L. // J. Mater. Sci: Mater. Med. 2006. V. 17. P. 967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-006-0432-z
  2. Miguez-Pacheco V., Hench L.L., Boccaccini A.R. // Acta Biomater. 2015. V. 13. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.11.004
  3. Mazzoni E., Iaquinta M.-R., Lanzillotti C. et al. // Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2021. V. 9. P. 613787. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.613787
  4. Wang R., Li H., Sun H. // Encyclopedia of Environmental Health. 2019. P. 415. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11870-6
  5. Shahbazi‐Gahrouei D., Choghazardi Y., Kazemzadeh A. et al. // IET Nanobiotechnol. 2023. V. 17. P. 302. https://doi.org/10.1049/nbt2.12134
  6. Thomas F., Bialek B., Hensel R. // J. Clin. Toxicol. 2011. V. 3. P. 4. https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0495.S3-004
  7. Pazarçeviren A.E., Tahmasebifar A., Tezcaner A. et al. // Ceram. Int. 2018. V. 44. P. 3791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.11.164
  8. Mohn D., Zehnder M., Imfeld T., Stark W.J. // Int. Endod. J. 2010. V. 43. P. 210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01660.x
  9. Prasad S.S, Adarsh T., Anand A. et al. // J. Mater. Res. 2018. V. 33. P. 178. https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2017.442
  10. Wang L., Long N.J., Li L. et al. // Light Sci. Appl. 2018. V. 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41377-018-0007-z
  11. Du J., Ding H., Fu S. et al. // Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. Sec. Nanobiotechnology. 2023. V. 10. P. 1098923. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1098923
  12. Khatua C., Bodhak S., Kundu B., Balla V.K. // Materialia. 2018. V. 4. P. 361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtla.2018.10.014
  13. Heid S., Stoessel P.R., Tauböck T.T. et al. // Biomed Glass. 2016. V. 2. P. 29. https://doi.org/10.1515/bglass-2016-0004/html
  14. Pazarçeviren A.E., Evis Z., Keskin D., Tezcaner A. // Biomed Mater. 2019. V. 14. P. 035018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/ab007b
  15. Kokubo T., Takadama H. // Biomaterials. 2006. V. 27. P. 2907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.017
  16. Prasad S.S., Ratha I., Adarsh T. et al. // J. Mater. Res. 2018. V. 33. P. 178. https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2017.442
  17. Rabiee M., Nazparvar N., Azizian M. et al. // Ceram. Int. 2015. V. 41. P. 7241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.02.140
  18. Misch C.E. // Int. J. Oral Implantol. 1990. V. 6. P. 23.
  19. Łaczka M., Stoch L., Górecki J. // J. Alloys Compd. 1992. V. 186. P. 279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-8388(92)90015-2
  20. Плотникова О.С., Грищенко Д.Н., Медков М.А. и др. // Журн. неорган. химии. 2022. Т. 67. № 9. С. 1219. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0044457X22090094
  21. Смагулова З.Ш., Макарушко С.Г., Садыкова Х.М. и др. // Здоровье. Медицинская экология. М.: Наука, 2009. Т. 39–40. С. 173.
  22. Silver I.A., Deas J., Erecińska M. // Biomaterials. 2001. V. 22. P. 175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00173-3
  23. Cerruti M., Greenspan D., Powers K. // Biomaterials. 2005. V. 26. P. 1665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.07.009

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Diffraction pattern of a glass sample containing 40 wt.% Bi2O3

Download (48KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Photographs of samples doped with Bi2O3, wt. %: 5 (a), 10 (b), 20 (c), 40 (d)

Download (224KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Energy dispersive spectra of glasses doped with Bi2O3, wt. %: 5 (a), 10 (b), 20 (c), 40 (d)

Download (435KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Micrograph (a) and energy dispersive spectrum (b) of glass containing 5 wt.% Bi2O3 after being in SBF solution for 7 days.

Download (394KB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. Micrograph (a) and energy dispersive spectrum (b) of glass containing 5 wt.% Bi2O3 after being in SBF solution for 15 days.

Download (418KB)
Indexing metadata
7. Fig. 6. Micrograph (a) and energy dispersive spectrum (b) of glass containing 10 wt.% Bi2O3 after being in SBF solution for 15 days.

Download (505KB)
Indexing metadata
8. Fig. 7. pH values ​​of the model solution during degradation of Bioglass 45S5 glass doped with Bi2O3, wt. %: 0 (1), 5 (2), 10 (3), 20 (4), 40 (5)

Download (78KB)
Indexing metadata
9. Fig. 8. Dependence of pH values ​​on chemical degradation of the sample in a model Tris solution

Download (43KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences