The morphology and dimensions of bioactive materials are essential attributes to promote tissue culture. Bioactive materials with nanofibrous structure have excellent potential to be used as bone-defect fillers, since they mimic the collagen in the extracellular matrix. On the other hand, bioactive glasses with applications in regenerative medicine may present antibacterial properties, which depend on glass composition, concentration and the microorganisms tested. Likewise, their morphology may influence their antibacterial activity too. In the present work, the laser-spinning technique was used to produce bioactive glass nanofibers of two different compositions: 45S5 Bioglass® and ICIE16M, bioactive glass doped with zinc and strontium. Their antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus was tested by culturing them in dynamic conditions. Bacterial growth index profiles during the first days of experiment can be explained by the variations in the pH values of the media. The bactericidal effect of the doped nanofibers at longer times is justified by the release of zinc and strontium ions. Cytotoxicity was analyzed by means of cell viability tests performed with BALB/3T3 cell line.
CampocciaDMontanaroLArciolaCR. The significance of infection related to orthopedic devices and issues of antibiotic resistance. Biomaterials2006; 27: 2331–2339.
2.
BusscherHJvan der MeiHCSubbiahdossG. Biomaterial-associated infection: locating the finish line in the race for the surface. Sci Transl Med2012; 4: 153rv10–153rv10.
3.
StoorPSöderlingESalonenJI. Antibacterial effects of a bioactive glass paste on oral microorganisms. Acta Odontol Scand1998; 56: 161–165.
4.
MunukkaELeppärantaOKorkeamäkiM. Bactericidal effects of bioactive glasses on clinically important aerobic bacteria. J Mater Sci Mater Med2008; 19: 27–32.
5.
MortazaviVNahrkhalajiMMFathiMH. Antibacterial effects of sol-gel-derived bioactive glass nanoparticle on aerobic bacteria. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2010; 94: 160–168.
6.
HenchLL. The story of bioglass®. J Mater Sci Mater Med2006; 17: 967–978.
7.
JonesJR. Review of bioactive glass: from hench to hybrids. Acta Biomaterialia2013; 9: 4457–4486.
BrauerDSKarpukhinaNKediaG. Bactericidal strontium-releasing injectable bone cements based on bioactive glasses. J R Soc Interface2013; 10: 20120647–20120647.
13.
BoydDLiHTannerDA. The antibacterial effects of zinc ion migration from zinc-based glass polyalkenoate cements. J Mater Sci Mater Med2006; 17: 489–494.
14.
Greenspan DC, West JK, Lee S, et al. Anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial uses for bioactive glass compositions. Patent US2004228905, USA, 2004.
15.
Gilchrist T and Healy DM. Antimicrobial composition composed of controlled release glasses. Patent US6143318(A), USA, 2000.
16.
WersEOudadesseHLefeuvreB. Excess entropy and thermal behavior of cu-and Ti-doped bioactive glasses. J Therm Anal Calorim2014; 117: 579–588.
17.
HoppeAGüldalNSBoccacciniAR. A review of the biological response to ionic dissolution products from bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. Biomaterials2011; 32: 2757–2774.
18.
MouriñoVCattaliniJPRoetherJA. Composite polymer-bioceramic scaffolds with drug delivery capability for bone tissue engineering. Expert Opin Drug Delivery2013; 10: 1353–1365.
FredholmYCKarpukhinaNBrauerDS. Influence of strontium for calcium substitution in bioactive glasses on degradation, ion release and apatite formation. J R Soc Interface2012; 9: 880–889.
21.
MurphySBoydDMoaneS. The effect of composition on ion release from Ca–Sr–Na–Zn–Si glass bone grafts. J Mater Sci Mater Med2009; 20: 2207–2214.
22.
GerhardtL-CBoccacciniAR. Bioactive glass and glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Materials2010; 3: 3867–3910.
23.
GohY-FAlshemaryAZAkramM. In vitro study of nano-sized zinc doped bioactive glass. Mater Chem Phys2013; 137: 1031–1038.
24.
O’DonnellMDHillRG. Influence of strontium and the importance of glass chemistry and structure when designing bioactive glasses for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater2010; 6: 2382–2385.
25.
MiolaMVernéEVitale-BrovaroneC. Antibacterial bioglass-derived scaffolds: innovative synthesis approach and characterization. Int J Appl Glass Sci2016; 7: 238–247.
26.
StevensMMGeorgeJH. Exploring and engineering the cell surface interface. Science2005; 310: 1135–1138.
27.
KimHWKimHEKnowlesJC. Production and potential of bioactive glass nanofibers as a next-generation biomaterial. Adv Funct Mater2006; 16: 1529–1529.
28.
KimHWLeeHHChunGS. Bioactivity and osteoblast responses of novel biomedical nanocomposites of bioactive glass nanofiber filled poly(lactic acid). J Biomed Mater Res Part A2008; 85: 651–663.
29.
PoologasundarampillaiGWangDLiS. Cotton-wool-like bioactive glasses for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater2014; 10: 3733–3746.
QuinteroFMannABPouJ. Rapid production of ultralong amorphous ceramic nanofibers by laser spinning. Appl Phys Lett2007; 90: 153109–153109.
32.
CabalBQuinteroFDíazLA. Nanocomposites of silver nanoparticles embedded in glass nanofibres obtained by laser spinning. Nanoscale2013; 5: 3948–3953.
33.
WuZYHillRGJonesJR. Optimizing the processing of porous melt-derived bioactive glass scaffolds. Bioceram Dev Appl2011; 1: D110150–D110150.
34.
Quintero F, Comesaña R, Lusquiños F, et al. Production of zinc and strontium containing bioactive glass nanofibers. In: 24th European conference on biomaterials – annual conference of the European Society for Biomaterials, ESB 2011; Dublin; Ireland. 4–8 September 2011.
35.
LupuARPopescuT. The noncellular reduction of MTT tetrazolium salt by TiO2 nanoparticles and its implications for cytotoxicity assays. Toxicol in Vitro2013; 27: 1445–1450.
36.
SanthanaRLHingHLBaharudinO. Rapid method for transmission electron microscope study of Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923. Ann Microscope2007; 7: 102–108.
MasseraJAhmedIPetitL. Phosphate-based glass fiber vs. bulk glass: change in fiber optical response to probe in vitro glass reactivity. Mater Sci Eng C2014; 25: 251–257.
41.
HuSChangJLiuM. Study on antibacterial effect of 45S5 bioglass®. J Mater Sci Mater Med2009; 20: 281–286.
42.
HenchLL. An introduction to bioceramics, 2nd ed. London, UK: Imperial College Press, 2013.
43.
ZhangDLeppärantaOMunukkaE. Antibacterial effects and dissolution behavior of six bioactive glasses. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2010; 93: 475–483.
44.
PalzaHEscobarBBejaranoJ. Designing antimicrobial bioactive glass materials with embedded metal ions synthesized by the sol–gel method. Mater Sci Eng C2013; 33: 3795–3801.
45.
GentlemanEFredholmYCJellG. The effects of strontium-substituted bioactive glasses on osteoblasts and osteoclasts in vitro. Biomaterials2010; 31: 3949–3956.
46.
WattsSJHillRGO’DonnellMD. Influence of magnesia on the structure and properties of bioactive glasses. J Non-Cryst Solids2010; 356: 517–524.
GorritiMFLópezJMPBoccacciniAR. In vitro study of the antibacterial activity of bioactive Glass-ceramic scaffolds. Adv Eng Mater2009; 11: B67–B70.
49.
RivadeneiraJCarina AudisioMBoccacciniAR. In vitro antistaphylococcal effects of a novel 45S5 bioglass/agar–gelatin biocomposite films. J Appl Microbiol2013; 115: 604–612.
50.
ClarkinOWrenAThorntonR. Antibacterial analysis of a zinc-based glass polyalkenoate cement. J Biomater Appl2011; 26: 277–292.
51.
ArakhaMSaleemMMallickBC. The effects of interfacial potential on antimicrobial propensity of ZnO nanoparticle. Scientific Rep2015; 5: 9578–9578.
52.
AnnLCMahmudSBakhoriSKM. Antibacterial responses of zinc oxide structures against Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Streptococcus pyogenes. Ceram Int2014; 40: 2993–3001.
53.
ChudobovaDDostalovaSRuttkay-NedeckyB. The effect of metal ions on Staphylococcus aureus revealed by biochemical and mass spectrometric analyses. Microbiol Res2015; 170: 147–156.
54.
DuttaRKNenavathuBPGangishettyMK. Antibacterial effect of chronic exposure of low concentration ZnO nanoparticles on E coli. J Environ Sci Health Part A Toxic/Hazard Subst Environ Eng2013; 48: 871–878.
55.
AtmacaSGulKClcekR. The effect of zinc on microbial growth. Turk J Med Sci1998; 28: 595–597.
56.
KolmasJGroszykEKwiatkowska-RózyckaD. Substituted hydroxyapatites with antibacterial properties. BioMed Res Int2014; 2014: 178123–178123.
57.
SöderbergTASunzelBHolmS. Antibacterial effect of zinc oxide in vitro. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg1990; 24: 193–197.
58.
KokuboTKimH-MKawashitaM. Novel bioactive materials with different mechanical properties. Biomaterials2003; 24: 2161–2175.
59.
Vallet-RegíMVictoria RagelCSalinasAJ. Glasses with medical applications. Eur J Inorg Chem2003; 2003: 1029–1042.
60.
ErolMÖzyuguranAÇelebicanO. Synthesis, characterization, and in vitro bioactivity of Sol-Gel-Derived Zn, Mg, and Zn-Mg co-doped bioactive glasses. Chem Eng Technol2010; 33: 1066–1074.
61.
Echezarreta-LópezMMDe MiguelTQuinteroF. Antibacterial properties of laser spinning glass nanofibers. Int J Pharm2014; 477: 113–121.
