A Review on the Role of Wollastonite Biomaterial in Bone Tissue Engineering

Zenebe, Chirotaw Getem

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4996530

BioMed Research International

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 4996530 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4996530

A Review on the Role of Wollastonite Biomaterial in Bone Tissue Engineering

Chirotaw Getem Zenebe¹

Academic Editor: Rafael Scaf De Molon

Received04 Sept 2022

Revised26 Nov 2022

Accepted29 Nov 2022

Published13 Dec 2022

Abstract

Millions of people around the world have bone-tissue defects. Autologous and allogeneic bone grafting are frequent therapeutic techniques; however, none has produced the best therapeutic results. This has inspired researchers to investigate novel bone-regeneration technologies. In recent years, the development of bone tissue engineering (BTE) scaffolds has been at the forefront of this discipline. Due to their limitless supply and lack of disease transmission, engineered bone tissue has been advanced for the repair and reconstruction of bone deformities. Bone tissue is a highly vascularized, dynamic tissue that constantly remodels during an individual’s lifetime. Bone tissue engineering is aimed at stimulating the creation of new, functional bone by combining biomaterials, cells, and factor treatment synergistically. This article provides a review of wollastonite’s biomaterial application in bone tissue engineering. This work includes an explanation of wollastonite minerals including mining, raw materials for the synthesis of artificial wollastonite with various methods, its biocompatibility, and biomedical applications. Future perspectives are also addressed, along with topics like bone tissue engineering, the qualities optimal bone scaffolds must have, and the way a scaffold is designed can have a big impact on how the body reacts.

1. Introduction

The first step in creating an effective scaffold for bone healing is to comprehend the physiology of real bone. Bone is a remarkable organ that plays a significant role in vital physiological processes in humans, including blood production, mineral storage and homeostasis, blood pH management, and various progenitor cells (mesenchymal and hemopoietic) housing [1, 2]. It mostly consists of cancellous (trabecular) and cortical bone. The cortical tissue is the outermost and denser boundary of the bone mass, whereas the cancellous tissue makes up the interior, softer, lighter-density, and highly vascularized core of the bone mass (50-90 v/v%) [3, 4].

The cancellous bone is exceedingly porous (30-90%) [5, 6] and is wherein maximum metabolic activities take place. It has a compressive strength of 7-10 MPa and is characterized by a lower elastic modulus and very low tensile strength () [7, 8]. Cellular activity affects how permeable the cancellate tissue is, and mediators that impact cellular activity can change the trabeculate structures that determine pore size. It allows the passage of nutrients and metabolic waste and house bone marrow, blood vessels, and many other biological components [8, 9]. The cortical tissue has a higher elastic modulus, higher stiffness, and lower toughness due to its increased mineralization content and lack of organic matter [10]. It serves as a protective cage for the interior delicate cancellous tissue and has a denser, tougher structure (5-30% porosity). Because of its high compressive strength range of 130 to 225 MPa, cortical bone also serves as the primary structural support element in the body (Y: 60-160 MPa; E: 3-30 GPa) [11]. The combination of these two tissues gives bone a special mechanical structure that can withstand more loads and deformations than each of its constituent parts could have done on their own [12].

The calcium phosphate mineral family member nanohydroxyapatite (HA, Ca₁₀(PO₄)₆(OH₂)), which makes up about 70% of bone, is a typical complex tissue with a hierarchical structure [13]. The remaining 20-30% is made up of a mix of water, which is connected to the collagen protein family, and other proteins and proteoglycans, which make up the organic components of bone mass [14]. Volume and weight fraction ratios of hydroxyapatite to collagen and water are not consistent. It depends on age and is also species-specific [2]. However, bone can lose one or all functions because of different damages.

Bone loss can take the form of actual faults and structural loss within an existing bone, as in osteopenia, or it can take the form of structural defects and areas lacking of bone due to external sources. Trauma and pathological conditions such as osteomyelitis, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, and cancer can all result in a bone defect [14, 15]. Bone loss can occur primarily or secondarily. Primary bone loss can happen in bone illnesses like cancer. Metastatic illness is the most frequent cause of secondary bone loss. Osteoblastic or osteolytic characteristics may be present in tumor metastases. Both compromise the structure, nourishment, and metabolism of the bone [16, 17]. Trauma is the most common cause of bone defects. When the variety of bone defects surpasses the critical-size defect (CSD), the bone defects cannot heal with the aid of using themselves and require affordable medical intervention. Large bone defects or injuries are therefore severe issues in orthopedics that harm health and quality of life. These conditions can be brought on by old age, traffic accidents, fracture nonunion, and bone tumor removal [18–20].

An epidemiological study from 2010 to 2025 found that fractures increased in frequency in Europe at a rate of 28% per year, with an additional 25% economic burden, sparking intense interest in the field of bone repair medicine [21]. The quality of life of a patient is significantly impacted by bone loss. Consequently, the cost of bone-related medical operations is increasing. Broken or fractured bones are routinely among the most frequent traumatic injuries suffered by people, regardless of race, age, or gender. Due to this, with over two million surgeries performed each year, bone is now the second most frequently transplanted tissue worldwide [22, 23].

Autologous and allogeneic bone transplants are the main treatment options currently used in clinical settings to address large-sized bone defects. The fact that autogenous bone has good osteoinductivity, osteoconductivity, and osseointegration properties, which can form a coordinated structure and ensure mechanical strength at the bone-defect site, makes autologous bone grafts the gold standard for bone-tissue reparation and regeneration [24–26]. Autogenic bone transplantation does, however, have certain unavoidable downsides, including high prices, donor location neurovascular damage, inflammation, and infection. Allogeneic bone implants are frequently used to correct those flaws because they are readily available. However, issues with allograft bone transplantation include inadequate osseointegration, immunological denial, and the spread of blood diseases [27]. Researchers began looking for artificial substitutes for grafts made naturally from bone as a result of this circumstance. To replace autograft and allograft therapy, artificial bone has undergone several preparations. With the use of bone tissue engineering (BTE), it is possible to create artificial bone substitutes that have the same, better, or more functional properties as natural bone. BTE currently enables researchers to employ a variety of strategies to mix cells, biomaterials, and biological factors to create synthetic tissues for mending bone abnormalities [28, 29]. There are no obvious problems with this method, which has the advantages of great modifiability, low infectivity risk, and excellent biocompatibility [30, 31].

2. Bone Tissue Engineering (BTE)

BTE encompasses applying engineering techniques, biomaterial concepts, and finally the use of chemicals and growth hormones to enhance biological processes. It strives to successfully integrate bone regeneration at the locations of the host’s defects without introducing any extra problems, such as donor site morbidity, immunogenicity, or poor vascularization. To create the ideal bioactive conditions and crucial mechanical support to encourage the formation of new bone tissue in defect areas, BTE uses biocompatible and biodegradable natural materials [32–34]. BTE induces new tissue repairing and regeneration by the synergy of cells, signals, and scaffolds [35]. Biomaterial-based scaffolds act as carriers for cells and messages. Scaffolding promotes cell adhesion, development, and differentiation in addition to providing a possibility for bone growth [36]. BTE attempts to create 3D constructs using a combination of cells and organic and synthetic materials and scaffolds that may be mechanically, structurally, and functionally superior to or functionally similar to the injured tissues [37, 38]. The implanted scaffold gradually deteriorates as the new tissue develops, eventually being totally replaced by it. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology can be used to design and manufacture customized scaffolds. Typically, biological research should be done on the generated scaffolds [35, 39].

In vitro culture experiments, such as scaffold toxicity tests using animal or human cells, and in vivo animal experiments, such as repairing femur defects in rats, are two categories into which the fundamental strategies of biological studies can be divided as forecasting checks before the preclinical test [40, 41]. Animal models have been used in clinical investigations with successful outcomes. The optimal cell source, the type of biomedical treatment method, the preparation process, and the application of growth factors are just a few of the challenges that prevent laboratory-made biomedical devices and procedures from moving quickly to the clinical stage [42, 43]. The loading of medication, such as antibiotics, proteins, genes, anti-inflammatory medicines, and growth factors into scaffolds for tissue regeneration, is likely to have a role in the restoration of damaged tissues [44]. Wollastonite has lately emerged as a promising choice for biomaterials due to its beneficial characteristics, such as biocompatibility, biodegradability, nontoxicity, and excellent mechanical capabilities [45–47]. The porous wollastonite scaffold utilized in bone tissue regeneration may contain the desired medicines [48].

The single or multiphase scaffold composition, surface chemistry [49, 50], architectural parameters like pore size and interconnectivity [51–53], the rate of degradation and the degradation products [54], and the local mechanical properties of the matrix like modulus and viscoelasticity can all have a significant impact on the biological response. Surface alterations or the inclusion of bioactive components are commonly required for structural biomaterial scaffolds that provide appropriate mechanical properties to attain the desired combination of attributes [55, 56]. Host cells should be able to deposit extracellular matrix (ECM) and eventually replace the scaffold structure because scaffolds are not intended to be long-lasting implants [57, 58].

The architecture of the scaffold must be extremely porous and constant to permit cell and nutrient mobility [59, 60]. Optimizing the scaffold surface is also necessary to encourage cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation [61, 62]. The scaffold fabric needs to be versatile enough to be easily molded into a range of shapes and sizes to allow in situ therapy of particular patient bone defects. Successful material design for BTE requires an appropriate choice of biomimetic natural or tunable synthetic materials (biomaterials), including polymers, bioceramics, metals, and composites. This includes understanding the composition and structure of the local bone tissue [30, 58, 63].

Figure 1 Shows the timeline of major milestones in biomaterials design for bone-tissue engineering. In the early stages of bone regeneration, calcium phosphates and bioresorbable metals were used. After that, research on bone formation in polymeric materials and the discovery of bioglass and the first man-made substance capable of attaching to living tissues were conducted. Further investigation led to the identification of bioactive compounds like proteins and peptides, and BTE was created as a distinct scientific field. Afterward, scaffolds were created using a variety of materials and then modified to trigger different biological processes. Regulatory bodies have evaluated products comprising different biomaterials as they were being developed for use in BTE applications, and some commercial products have been approved for use in clinical settings. BMP stands for bone morphogenetic protein; FDA stands for Food and Drug Administration of the United States; RGD stands for arginine-glycine-aspartic acid [64, 65].

A synthetic bone scaffold must meet the following biomimetic requirements: biocompatible, sufficient surface area with 3D structure [66], gives temporary mechanical support to the afflicted zone [67], serves as a substrate for osteoid deposition [68], vascularization, and bone in-growth that are made possible by their porous architecture [69, 70], elicits the migration of bone cells into the scaffold [71, 72], osteogenic differentiation support and promotion in the synthetic, nonosseous scaffold (osteoinduction) [69], promotes cellular activity for osseointegration, the process by which the scaffold is incorporated into the host tissue [69, 73, 74], to enable weight transfer to growing bone, deteriorate in a regulated manner [17, 75], provides harmless degradation byproducts [76–78], not incite an active chronic inflammatory response [79, 80], be capable of sterilization without loss of bioactivity [81, 82], and delivers bioactive molecules or drugs in a controlled way to accelerate healing and prevent pathology [83].

3. Synthesis, Structure, and Properties of Wollastonite

Wollastonite (CaSiO₃) has a theoretical composition of 51.7% silicon dioxide (SiO₂) and 48.3% calcium oxide (CaO) [84–86]. However, it might have trace or negligible levels of aluminum, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, or strontium [87] and manifests as large to acicular prismatic crystals that fracture [88]. Typically, it is white, but depending on its makeup, it could also be gray, brown, or red [89]. When impure limestones undergo metamorphosis (are heated and pressed), or when silica-bearing fluids are added to calcareous sediments during the metamorphic processes, wollastonite is created. Both times, calcite and silica react to form wollastonite and carbon dioxide [90]. Wollastonite naturally exists in two polymorphic states: the low-temperature phase β-wollastonite and the high-temperature phase α-pseudowollastonite [91, 92]. β-Wollastonite powders exhibit phase change and transform into α-wollastonite by sintering at temperatures above 1125°C [93]. The β-wollastonite mineral is obtained as a natural silicate mineral, whereas α-wollastonite is rarely found in nature [94]. The CaO-SiO₂ binary phase diagram [93] shows that the wollastonite mineral phase is formed at lower temperatures than wollastonite. White, needle-like wollastonite mineral powder is its natural state. Micrographs taken using scanning electron microscopy show that wollastonite powder is solid and has rough surfaces as shown in Figure 2 [95–97].

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

The size of wollastonite in ore form and the degree to which the shape and size are kept during processing determine the grades of wollastonite [45, 98]. Crushing, sorting, and beneficiation procedures are used to produce natural wollastonite powder. The grades of wollastonite particles will then be determined by specialized milling methods [45, 99] as shown in Figure 3. It is possible to produce low aspect ratio grades ranging from 3 : 1 to 5 : 1 and high aspect ratio grades with average lengths between 20 and 200 m using various mills and classifiers [45, 98]. Wollastonite’s surface is typically modified using chemical coupling agents including titanate, silane, and betaine as well as surface modifiers like stearic acid and pimelic acid [100]. The physical properties of wollastonite are presented in Table 1.

Wollastonite crystallizes triclinically in space group P1 with the lattice constants , , and ; , , , and 6 formula units per unit cell [105]. Due to its crystal structure, wollastonite belongs to the class of minerals known as pyroxenoids. It has been established that pyroxenoid chains are more kinked and have a greater repeat distance than pyroxene group chains. Infinite (SiO4) tetrahedra with shared vertices that are parallel to the -axis make up wollastonite [106]. In pyroxenes, only two tetrahedra are required, as opposed to three in wollastonite, where the chain pattern repeats after each (Figure 4) [105].

(a)

(b)

China, Finland, India, Mexico, Canada, and the USA are the countries where most wollastonite minerals are located and mines [47]. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports that China would produce 890,000 tons of wollastonite in 2020, making it the world’s top producer of the mineral. With 120,000 tons, India comes in second. Mexico and Canada are in third and fourth place with around 100,000 and 20,000 tons, respectively. There is a shortage of production data from USGS reports, but it is anticipated to be large and unchanged from 2019 [107].

Wollastonite is a tremendously interesting, but little-studied mineral that has a mixture of properties, such as a lack of volatile constituents [108], low shrinkage [109], fluxing characteristics [110], low dielectric constant and low dielectric loss [91, 111], thermal stability and low thermal expansion [98], low of loss on ignition [112] and low thermal conductivity [111], good bioactivity, biocompatibility, and degradability [113, 114], hence, is used in ceramic fabrication, medical material for artificial bones and dental roots, high-frequency insulator, filler for plastics and resins, paper, glazes for ceramics, metallurgy, paint, and frictional products [115, 116]. Due to its mechanical bioactivity and biocompatibility qualities, wollastonite, a glassy mineral with a calcium silicate base that is part of a class of bioactive and biocompatible materials, has a wider range of uses in medicine and as fillers for composite fabrication as well as for dental restoration and artificial bones [117–119]. Synthetic wollastonite can be prepared from various raw materials using different types of methods (Table 2).

4. Properties of Wollastonite Scaffolds and Implications to Use

When grafting native tissue, a bioactive material devoted to bone tissue restoration must encourage good bony growth [139, 140]. Biocompatibility and bacterial infections are the main challenges to current alternatives to bone transplants. Wollastonite-based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering have a greater potential to replace bone grafts in orthopedic applications due to their physicochemical characteristics, antibacterial properties, biocompatibility, and osteogenic induction effect on human bone marrow-derived stromal cells [141].

A more recent technology developed for bioactive glass-ceramic foams involves the use of polymer-derived ceramics [142–144]. In this approach, metal oxide precursors in the form of micro- or nanosized particles are added to a polymeric precursor (e.g., a silicone resin), allowing the production of silicate bioceramics (Figure 5). The foaming is obtained by water release from specific hydrated fillers. The foams are then sintered. Fiocco et al. showed the possibility of obtaining wollastonite-diopside (CaSiO₃-CaMgSi₂O₆) foams with 77% porosity and compressive strength of [145].

New materials for a bone replacement that offer extended implant lives, full integration, and suitable mechanical qualities were required on a clinical level. According to Dyson et al., human mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) were utilized to fill porous apatite-wollastonite (A-W) glass-ceramic scaffolds created using the layer manufacturing procedure and selective laser sintering, to produce individualized bone replacements [146].

The addition of 50% wollastonite to the hydroxyapatite matrix improves the porous scaffolds’ strength, bioactivity, and biodegradability. The biodegradability tests reveal that the wollastonite-based composite scaffold could be quickly degraded when compared to pure hydroxyapatite [147, 148]. It was possible to develop biomedical applications for the β-wollastonite materials made from rice husk ash and limestone due to their favorable bioactivity and degradation characteristics. The SEM analysis of cell development on A-W scaffolds at various time points is displayed in Figure 6.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

The loss of mass increased incrementally while the β-wollastonite samples were immersed in simulated body fluid (SBF) as a function of the soaking period [126]. According to the study of Ge et al., the wollastonite-hydroxyapatite composite biomaterial developed more blood vessels after 12 weeks of surgery. The material is safe in vivo therapeutically and can encourage the production and growth of new bone in the faulty location [147]. In earlier research, a porous glass-ceramic scaffold derived from apatite and wollastonite was produced with controlled pore size and porosity that revealed open macropores and met the fundamental criteria for a bone tissue engineering scaffold. The scaffolds also show great potential for use in bone regenerative medicine [149]. Wollastonite is an ideal candidate for biomaterial applications, particularly in orthopedics, as demonstrated by the development of the bioactive substance hydroxycarbonate apatite on the surface of a plasma-sprayed wollastonite coating soaked in simulated bodily fluid [150].

The Mg-doping wollastonite (CSi-Mg)/β-tricalcium phosphate (TCPx) scaffolds are capable of treating some challengeable bone defects, especially for load-bearing bone repair [151]. The two-step chemical precipitation and porogen burnout processes that were used to create the wollastonite/tricalcium phosphate macroporous nanosintered scaffolds resulted in less strength loss during the degrading phase. The scaffolds provide great potential for applications in bone reconstruction [152]. The CSi-Mgx ceramic powders and scaffolds’ characterization are shown in Figure 7.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Xie et al. achieved ultrahigh strength bioceramic porous (>120 MPa) scaffolds using dilute magnesium-doped wollastonite inks and 3D printing techniques [154]. They show exceptional strength and degradability on osteogenic capacity in rabbit calvarial defects, making the 3D-printed diluted magnesium doping wollastonite, CSi-Mgx scaffolds promising for bone regeneration in thin-wall bone defects [153]. The 3D-printed diluted magnesium doping wollastonite, CSi-Mgx scaffolds show amazing strength and degradability on osteogenic capacity in rabbit calvarial defects, making them promising for bone regeneration in thin-wall bone defects [155]. The morphological and physiologically identical properties of the bone scaffold are created using a combination of bioactive porous silicon and wollastonite. It can open up the door for treating particular orthopedic problems by altering the design using additive manufacturing. In order to build the scaffolds in various topologies, additive manufacturing using a selective laser melting technique has been used [156, 157]. Stereolithography and the lost-mold method with gel-casting were used to create highly porous ceramic scaffolds from a wollastonite glass power. These scaffolds’ strength and modulus are equivalent to those reported for other porous ceramic scaffold materials of similar porosity created by various fabrication techniques [158, 159]. Silicon-wollastonite-based scaffolds produced by selective laser melting show high bioactivity and controlled growth of the hydroxyapatite-like layer on the surface of the structures [156].

Compression molding, heat processing, and salt particulate leaching method and strategy were used to successfully produce the composite scaffolds of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxy valerate) (PHBV) with bioactive wollastonite [160]. One of the crucial factors for scaffolds designed for tissue engineering is water uptake [161]. This property influences the transport of water and nutrients into the scaffold, which promotes cell growth. The water absorption of the PHBV scaffold is altered when wollastonite (WOL) is added [162, 163]. The addition of 10 wt% wollastonite exhibited a different kinetic mechanism and absorbed 44.1% more water than the uncontaminated PHBV scaffold when compared to other samples. Therefore, PHBV/WOL scaffolds can be a good choice for biological applications [163]. He et al. prepared a scaffold with excellent mechanical properties and long-term stability using diopside- (DIO-) based porous bioceramic composites via dilute magnesium-substituted wollastonite reinforcing and three-dimensional (3D) printing. The scaffold can potentially be used in the clinic, especially for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head working as a bioceramic rod [164]. Schmidt et al. also demonstrated that the wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramic complex structures material may be used to make bioceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. They maintained their structure flawlessly, showed no viscous flow, and uniformly shrank by around 25%. With Kelvin structures, the cell design has a compressive strength of more than 3 MPa at 83% porosity [165].

The use of three-dimensional (3D) bioactive glass-derived porous scaffolds is an excellent method for accelerating bone healing and regeneration in substantial osseous defect areas [166, 167]. By using the foam replica process and the aforementioned bioactive glass powders as the parent material, the macroporous glass-ceramic scaffolds were created from SiO₂, P₂O₅, CaO, MgO, Na₂O, and CaF₂. The scaffold exhibits bioactive behavior in vitro while submerged in simulated bodily fluids, and the mechanical characteristics were also possibly acceptable to indicate use in load-bearing bone applications [166]. A possible technique for promoting mineralization while the scaffold is incubated in a simulated physiological fluid is the production of biomimetic paste-type inks produced from wollastonite and fish gelatin in a mass ratio similar to that of natural bone. Also highlighted are the bicomponent inks’ capacity to create three-dimensional bioactive scaffolds and their anticipated osteogenic capabilities for applications involving bone regeneration [168].

5. Bone Tissue Engineering Applications of Wollastonite

Despite the high capacity of Wollastonite, little attention has been given to its application in the field of bone tissue engineering. In the following table (Table 3), different works published on wollastonite applications in bone tissue engineering are presented.

6. Conclusion

The goal of the paper is to review the applications of wollastonite in bone-tissue engineering by investigating the results presented in several published articles. It has been found that both natural and synthesized wollastonite can be a potential candidate for bone tissue engineering. However, the literature review indicated that there was still little data about the employment of wollastonite in bone tissue engineering and demonstrating further study would be performed, and that a lot of research would be needed about wollastonite, its composites, and its uses in bone tissue engineering. In conclusion, wollastonite illustrated different favorable properties; hence, it could be further investigated in diverse bone tissue engineering applications.

Data Availability

All data are included within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares that they have no conflicts of interest and declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

C. Caramella, B. Conti, T. Modena et al., “Controlled delivery systems for tissue repair and regeneration,” Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology, vol. 32, pp. 206–228, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Venkatesan, I. Bhatnagar, P. Manivasagan, K.-H. Kang, and S.-K. Kim, “Alginate composites for bone tissue engineering: a review,” International journal of biological macromolecules, vol. 72, pp. 269–281, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Abd Rashid, R. Shamsudin, M. A. Abdul Hamid, and A. Jalar, “Low temperature production of wollastonite from limestone and silica sand through solid-state reaction,” Journal of Asian Ceramic Societies, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 77–81, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. E. Kundrat, A Comprehensive Series for Predicting Bone Dynamics: Forecasting Osseous Tissue Formation Using the Molecular Structure of a Biomaterial, University of Dayton, 2010.
J. Čapek, M. Machová, M. Fousová et al., “Highly porous, low elastic modulus 316l stainless steel scaffold prepared by selective laser melting,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 69, pp. 631–639, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. F. Khan, A. Afzal, A. A. Chaudhary et al., “(Hydroxypropyl) methylcellulose mediated synthesis of highly porous composite scaffolds for trabecular bone repair applications,” Science of Advanced Materials, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1177–1186, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P.-Y. Chen and J. McKittrick, “Compressive mechanical properties of demineralized and deproteinized cancellous bone,” Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 961–973, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Wubneh, E. K. Tsekoura, C. Ayranci, and H. Uludağ, “Current state of fabrication technologies and materials for bone tissue engineering,” Acta Biomaterialia, vol. 80, pp. 1–30, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Fernandez-Yague, S. A. Abbah, L. McNamara, D. I. Zeugolis, A. Pandit, and M. J. Biggs, “Biomimetic approaches in bone tissue engineering: integrating biological and physicomechanical strategies,” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 84, pp. 1–29, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
https://www.infonile.org/en/2018/06/water-hyacinth-a-threat-to-lake-tana/.
M. Vlasea, A. Basalah, A. Azhari, R. Kandel, and E. Toyserkani, “Additive manufacturing for bone load bearing applications,” in 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, pp. 337–370, Elsevier, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Pal, Design of Artificial Human Joints & Organs, Springer, 2014.
S. V. Dorozhkin, Calcium Orthophosphate-Based Bioceramics and Biocomposites, John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
M. S. Carvalho, J. Cabral, C. L. da Silva, and D. Vashishth, “Bone matrix non-collagenous proteins in tissue engineering: creating new bone by mimicking the extracellular matrix,” Polymers, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 1095, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Irfan and M. Irfan, “Overview of hydroxyapatite; composition, structure, synthesis methods and its biomedical uses,” Biomedical Letters, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 17–22, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Huang, K. Dai, and X. Zhang, “Native polymer-based 3d substitutes for bone repair,” Native Macromolecule-based 3d Tissues Repair, World Scientific, pp. 145–183, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
J. R. Porter, T. T. Ruckh, and K. C. Popat, “Bone tissue engineering: a review in bone biomimetics and drug delivery strategies,” Biotechnology progress, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1539–1560, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Garcia, T. Histing, J. Holstein et al., “Rodent animal models of delayed bone healing and non-union formation: a comprehensive review,” European Cells and Materials, vol. 26, no. 1, p. 12, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Jahan and M. Tabrizian, “Composite biopolymers for bone regeneration enhancement in bony defects,” Biomaterials science, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 25–39, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zheng, J. Huang, J. Lin et al., “3D bioprinting in orthopedics translational research,” Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, vol. 30, no. 13, pp. 1172–1187, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Hernlund, A. Svedbom, M. Ivergård et al., “Osteoporosis in the european union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden,” Archives of osteoporosis, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–115, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Love, A. S. Din, M. B. Tomas, T. P. Kalapparambath, and C. J. Palestro, “Radionuclide bone imaging: an illustrative review,” Radiographics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 341–358, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Sriram, R. Sainitya, V. Kalyanaraman, S. Dhivya, and N. Selvamurugan, “Biomaterials mediated microrna delivery for bone tissue engineering,” International journal of biological macromolecules, vol. 74, pp. 404–412, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Uygur, T. Eryilmaz, O. Cukurluoglu, S. Ozmen, and R. Yavuzer, “Management of cranial bone Defects,” Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1606–1609, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Vidal, C. Kampleitner, M. Á. Brennan, A. Hoornaert, and P. Layrolle, “Reconstruction of large skeletal defects: current clinical therapeutic strategies and future directions using 3D printing,” Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, vol. 8, p. 61, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Zhu, T. Zhang, M. Chen et al., “Bone physiological microenvironment and healing mechanism: basis for future bone-tissue engineering scaffolds,” Bioactive materials, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 4110–4140, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. S. Restrepo, S. Martinez, D. F. Lemos et al., “Imaging appearances of the sternum and sternoclavicular joints,” Radiographics, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 839–859, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Akter, “Principles of tissue engineering,” in Tissue Engineering Made Easy, pp. 3–16, Elsevier, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Lanza, R. Langer, J. P. Vacanti, and A. Atala, Principles of tissue engineering, Academic Press, 2020.
J. Henkel, M. A. Woodruff, D. R. Epari et al., “Bone Regeneration Based on Tissue Engineering Conceptions -- A 21st Century Perspective,” Bone Research, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 216–248, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. J. Sheehy, D. J. Kelly, and F. J. O'Brien, “Biomaterial-based endochondral bone regeneration: a shift from traditional tissue engineering paradigms to developmentally inspired strategies,” Materials Today Bio, vol. 3, article 100009, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Bharadwaz and A. C. Jayasuriya, “Recent trends in the application of widely used natural and synthetic polymer nanocomposites in bone tissue regeneration,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 110, article 110698, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. N. Christy, S. K. Basha, V. S. Kumari et al., “Biopolymeric nanocomposite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications - A review,” Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology, vol. 55, article 101452, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Tang, Z. Liu, Y. Liu et al., “Recent trends in the development of bone regenerative biomaterials,” Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, vol. 9, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Qu, H. Fu, Z. Han, and Y. Sun, “Biomaterials for bone tissue engineering scaffolds: a review,” RSC Advances, vol. 9, no. 45, pp. 26252–26262, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Zhu, D. Luo, and Y. Liu, “Effect of the nano/microscale structure of biomaterial scaffolds on bone regeneration,” International Journal of Oral Science, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. R. Amini, C. T. Laurencin, and S. P. Nukavarapu, “Bone tissue engineering: recent advances and challenges. Critical reviews™,” Biomedical Engineering, vol. 40, no. 5, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
M. N. Collins, G. Ren, K. Young, S. Pina, R. L. Reis, and J. M. Oliveira, “Scaffold fabrication technologies and structure/function properties in bone tissue engineering,” Advanced Functional Materials, vol. 31, no. 21, article 2010609, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Woo Lee and D.-W. Cho, “3D printing technology over a drug delivery for tissue engineering,” Current Pharmaceutical Design, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1606–1617, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Ahn, J. Ko, S. Lee, J. Yu, Y. Kim, and N. L. Jeon, “Microfluidics in nanoparticle drug delivery; from synthesis to pre-clinical screening,” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 128, pp. 29–53, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Hulsart-Billström, J. Dawson, S. Hofmann et al., “A surprisingly poor correlation between in vitro and in vivo testing of biomaterials for bone regeneration: results of a multicentre analysis,” European Cells and Materials, vol. 31, pp. 312–322, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Dong, S.-J. Wang, X.-R. Zhao, Y.-F. Zhu, and J.-K. Yu, “3D- Printed Poly(ε-caprolactone) Scaffold Integrated with Cell-laden Chitosan Hydrogels for Bone Tissue Engineering,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Hoseinpour and Z. Shariatinia, “Applications of zeolitic imidazolate framework-8 (zif-8) in bone tissue engineering: a review,” Tissue and Cell, vol. 72, article 101588, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Dorati, A. DeTrizio, T. Modena et al., “Biodegradable scaffolds for bone regeneration combined with drug-delivery systems in osteomyelitis therapy,” Pharmaceuticals, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 96, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. X. Chan, J. F. Wong, A. Hassan, Z. Mohamad, and N. Othman, “Mechanical properties of wollastonite reinforced thermoplastic composites: a review,” Polymer Composites, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 395–429, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Lin, J. Chang, and J. Lu, “Synthesis of wollastonite nanowires via hydrothermal microemulsion methods,” Materials Letters, vol. 60, no. 24, pp. 3007–3010, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. D. Maxim, R. Niebo, M. J. Utell, E. McConnell, S. LaRosa, and A. M. Segrave, “Wollastonite toxicity: an update,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 95–112, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Amiryaghoubi, M. Fathi, N. N. Pesyan, M. Samiei, J. Barar, and Y. Omidi, “Bioactive polymeric scaffolds for osteogenic repair and bone regenerative medicine,” Medicinal Research Reviews, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1833–1870, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Dave and V. G. Gomes, “Interactions at scaffold interfaces: Effect of surface chemistry, structural attributes and bioaffinity,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 105, article 110078, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Luo, G. Engelmayr, D. T. Auguste et al., “3d Scaffolds,” in Principles of tissue engineering, pp. 475–494, Elsevier, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
M. I. Gariboldi and S. M. Best, “Effect of ceramic scaffold architectural parameters on biological response,” Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, vol. 3, p. 151, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Kim, A. Yeatts, D. Dean, and J. P. Fisher, “Stereolithographic bone scaffold design parameters: osteogenic differentiation and signal expression,” Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 523–539, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. E. Ryan, A. S. Pandit, and D. P. Apatsidis, “Porous titanium scaffolds fabricated using a rapid prototyping and powder metallurgy technique,” Biomaterials, vol. 29, no. 27, pp. 3625–3635, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Odelius, A. Höglund, S. Kumar et al., “Porosity and pore size regulate the degradation product profile of polylactide,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1250–1258, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Healy and R. Guldberg, “Bone tissue engineering,” Journal of Musculoskeletal and Neuronal Interactions, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 328–330, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
K. M. Kennedy, A. Bhaw-Luximon, and D. Jhurry, “Cell-matrix mechanical interaction in electrospun polymeric scaffolds for tissue engineering: implications for scaffold design and performance,” Acta Biomaterialia, vol. 50, pp. 41–55, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. J. O'brien, “Biomaterials & scaffolds for tissue engineering,” Materials Today, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 88–95, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Turnbull, J. Clarke, F. Picard et al., “3D bioactive composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering,” Bioactive Materials, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 278–314, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Dehghani and N. Annabi, “Engineering porous scaffolds using gas-based techniques,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 661–666, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. F. Leong, M. Z. Rasheed, T. C. Lim, and K. S. Chian, “In vitro cell infiltration and in vivo cell infiltration and vascularization in a fibrous, highly porous poly (d, l-lactide) scaffold fabricated by cryogenic electrospinning technique,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 231–240, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H.-I. Chang and Y. Wang, Cell Responses to Surface and Architecture of Tissue Engineering Scaffolds, in Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering-Cells and Biomaterials, InTechOpen, 2011.
L. Cheng, R. Li, G. Liu et al., “Potential antibacterial mechanism of silver nanoparticles and the optimization of orthopedic implants by advanced modification technologies,” International Journal of Nanomedicine, vol. 13, p. 3311, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Abdulghani and G. R. Mitchell, “Biomaterials for in situ tissue regeneration: a review,” Biomolecules, vol. 9, no. 11, p. 750, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. L. Koons, M. Diba, and A. G. Mikos, “Materials design for bone-tissue engineering,” Nature Reviews Materials, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 584–603, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Liu, X. Xu, W. Cui, and H. Zhang, “Metal-organic framework (MOF)-based biomaterials in bone tissue engineering,” Engineered Regeneration, vol. 2, pp. 105–108, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Song, K. Lin, S. He et al., “Nano-biphasic calcium phosphate/polyvinyl alcohol composites with enhanced bioactivity for bone repair via low-temperature three-dimensional printing and loading with platelet-rich fibrin,” International Journal of Nanomedicine, vol. 13, pp. 505–523, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. P. Bhattarai, L. E. Aguilar, C. H. Park, and C. S. Kim, “A review on properties of natural and synthetic based electrospun fibrous materials for bone tissue engineering,” Membranes, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 62, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Singh, A. Tripathi, S. Zo, D. Singh, and S. S. Han, “Synthesis of composite gelatin-hyaluronic acid-alginate porous scaffold and evaluation for _in vitro_ stem cell growth and _in vivo_ tissue integration,” Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, vol. 116, pp. 502–509, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Goonoo, A. Bhaw-Luximon, G. L. Bowlin, and D. Jhurry, “An assessment of biopolymer-and synthetic polymer-based scaffolds for bone and vascular tissue engineering,” Polymer International, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 523–533, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Guda, J. A. Walker, B. Singleton et al., “Hydroxyapatite scaffold pore architecture effects in large bone defects in vivo,” Journal of Biomaterials Applications, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1016–1027, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. M. Bueno and J. Glowacki, “Cell-free and cell-based approaches for bone regeneration,” Nature Reviews Rheumatology, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 685–697, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Chen, H. Fan, X. Deng et al., “Scaffold structural microenvironmental cues to guide tissue regeneration in bone tissue applications,” Nanomaterials, vol. 8, no. 11, p. 960, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
F. D. Cojocaru, V. Balan, C.-E. Tanase et al., “Development and characterisation of microporous biomimetic scaffolds loaded with magnetic nanoparticles as bone repairing material,” Ceramics International, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 11209–11219, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Manzano and M. Vallet-Regí, “Revisiting bioceramics: bone regenerative and local drug delivery systems,” Progress in Solid State Chemistry, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 17–30, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Romagnoli, F. D’Asta, and M. L. Brandi, “Drug delivery using composite scaffolds in the context of bone tissue engineering,” Clinical Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 155–161, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
M. L. Gatto, G. Barucca, and P. Mengucci, “From pcl/ha powder to bioresorbable scaffold via laser powder bed fusion,” Microscopie, vol. 31, no. 1, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Joneidi Yekta, M. Shahali, S. Khorshidi et al., “Mathematically and experimentally defined porous bone scaffold produced for bone substitute application,” Nanomedicine Journal, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 227–234, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
M. S. B. Reddy, D. Ponnamma, R. Choudhary, and K. K. Sadasivuni, “A comparative review of natural and synthetic biopolymer composite scaffolds,” Polymers, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 1105, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Boddupalli, L. Zhu, and K. M. Bratlie, “Methods for implant acceptance and wound healing: material selection and implant location modulate macrophage and fibroblast phenotypes,” Advanced Healthcare Materials, vol. 5, no. 20, pp. 2575–2594, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Naahidi, M. Jafari, M. Logan et al., “Biocompatibility of hydrogel-based scaffolds for tissue engineering applications,” Biotechnology Advances, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 530–544, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Ferreira, P. Gentile, V. Chiono, and G. Ciardelli, “Collagen for bone tissue regeneration,” Acta biomaterialia, vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 3191–3200, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. J. No, J. J. Li, and H. Zreiqat, “Doped calcium silicate ceramics: a new class of candidates for synthetic bone substitutes,” Materials, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 153, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Campana, G. Milano, E. Pagano et al., “Bone substitutes in orthopaedic surgery: from basic science to clinical practice,” Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 2445–2461, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. K. Papynov, O. O. Shichalin, V. I. Apanasevich et al., “Synthetic CaSiO₃ sol-gel powder and SPS ceramic derivatives: " In vivo " toxicity assessment,” Progress in Natural Science: Materials International, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 569–575, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Shamsudin, H. Ismail, M. Hamid, and R. Awang, “Characteristics of wollastonite synthesized from rice husk and rice straw,” Solid State Science and Tech, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 61–69, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Vaziri, L. Abrahamsson, O. Hagman, and D. Sandberg, “Welding of wood in the presence of wollastonite,” BioResources, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1617–1628, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
P. A. Ciullo, Industrial Minerals and Their Uses: A Handbook and Formulary, William Andrew, 1996.
F. Sorrentino, D. Damidot, and C. Fentiman, “Application as fillers,” in Cao-Sio2-Ai2o3-Fe Oxides Chemical System, pp. 315–338, EDP Sciences, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
R. L. Virta and B. S. Van Gosen, “Mineral resource of the month: wollastonite,” Earth, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 51–51, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Daniel Maxim, R. Niebo, S. LaRosa, B. Johnston, K. Allison, and E. McConnell, “Product stewardship in wollastonite production,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 20, no. 14, pp. 1199–1214, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. S. Hossain and P. Roy, “Study of physical and dielectric properties of bio-waste-derived synthetic wollastonite,” Journal of Asian Ceramic Societies, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 289–298, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. S. Hossain, S. Yadav, S. Majumdar, S. Krishnamurthy, R. Pyare, and P. Roy, “A comparative study of physico-mechanical, bioactivity and hemolysis properties of pseudo-wollastonite and wollastonite glass-ceramic synthesized from solid wastes,” Ceramics International, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 833–843, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Vichaphund, M. Kitiwan, D. Atong, and P. Thavorniti, “Microwave synthesis of wollastonite powder from eggshells,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 31, no. 14, pp. 2435–2440, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Yazdani, H. R. Rezaie, and H. Ghassai, “Investigation of hydrothermal synthesis of wollastonite using silica and nano silica at different pressures,” Journal of Ceramic Processing Research, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 348–353, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. He, A. Shen, Z. Lyu, Y. Li, H. Wu, and W. Wang, “Effect of wollastonite microfibers as cement replacement on the properties of cementitious composites: a review,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 261, article 119920, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Palakurthy, “In vitro evaluation of silver doped wollastonite synthesized from natural waste for biomedical applications,” Ceramics International, vol. 45, no. 18, pp. 25044–25051, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. D. Ransinchung and B. Kumar, “Investigations on pastes and mortars of ordinary portland cement admixed with wollastonite and microsilica,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 305–313, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. F. Wong, J. X. Chan, A. B. Hassan, Z. Mohamad, and N. Othman, “Thermal and flammability properties of wollastonite-filled thermoplastic composites: a review,” Journal of Materials Science, vol. 56, no. 15, pp. 8911–8950, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. D. Maxim and E. McConnell, “A review of the toxicology and epidemiology of wollastonite,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 451–466, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Shuai, L. Yu, P. Feng, C. Gao, and S. Peng, “Interfacial reinforcement in bioceramic/biopolymer composite bone scaffold: the role of coupling agent,” Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, vol. 193, article 111083, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Dey, R. Kachala, A. Bonakdar, N. Neithalath, and B. Mobasher, “Quantitative 2D restrained shrinkage cracking of cement paste with wollastonite microfibers,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, vol. 28, no. 9, article 04016082, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. L. Virta and D. Revette, “Wollastonite,” Mining Engineering, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 61-62, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
M. A. Wahab, I. A. Latif, M. Kohail, and A. Almasry, “The use of wollastonite to enhance the mechanical properties of mortar mixes,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 152, pp. 304–309, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Zareei, F. Ameri, P. Shoaei, and N. Bahrami, “Recycled ceramic waste high strength concrete containing wollastonite particles and micro-silica: a comprehensive experimental study,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 201, pp. 11–32, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Gian, Study on ultraviolet-a of casio3: Ce3+ film phosphor, Pukyong National University, 2020.
E. Belokoneva, A. Topnikova, and S. Aksenov, “Topolology-symmetry law of structure of natural titanosilicate micas and related heterophyllosilicates based on the extended od theory: structure prediction,” Crystallography Reports, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
USGS, “National minerals information center,” May 2022, https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-wollastonite.pdf.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. H. Yun, S. D. Yun, H. R. Park, Y. K. Lee, and Y. N. Youn, “Preparation of β-wollastonite glass-ceramics,” Journal of Materials Synthesis and Processing, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 205–209, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Azarov, E. Maiorova, M. Oborina, and A. Belyakov, “Wollastonite raw materials and their applications (a review),” Glass and Ceramics, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 237–240, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. Turkmen, A. Kucuk, and S. Akpinar, “Effect of wollastonite addition on sintering of hard porcelain,” Ceramics International, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 5505–5512, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Shukur, E. Al-Majeed, and M. M. Obied, “Characteristic of wollastonite synthesized from local raw materials,” International Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 426–429, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Bulut, E. S. Akçin, and M. O. Kangal, “Value added industrial minerals production from calcite-rich wollastonite,” Gospodarka Surowcami Mineralnymi, vol. 35, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Palakurthy and R. K. Samudrala, “_In vitro_ bioactivity and degradation behaviour of β-wollastonite derived from natural waste,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 98, pp. 109–117, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. M. Rodríguez-Lorenzo, R. García-Carrodeguas, M. A. Rodríguez et al., “Synthesis, characterization, bioactivity and biocompatibility of nanostructured materials based on the wollastonite-poly (ethylmethacrylate-co-vinylpyrrolidone) system,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A: An Official Journal of The Society for Biomaterials, The Japanese Society for Biomaterials, and The Australian Society for Biomaterials and the Korean Society for Biomaterials, vol. 88A, no. 1, pp. 53–64, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Byregowda, T. Gangadhar, and M. A. Khan, “Investigation of compressive properties of wollastonite (casio3) reinforced acrylonitrile butadiene styrene composites,” International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research, vol. 8, no. 4, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Chehlatt, A. Harabi, E. Harabi, S. Zouai, H. Oudadesse, and S. E. Barama, “Biological properties study of bioactive wollastonite containing 5 wt% B₂O₃ prepared from local raw materials,” Desalination and Water Treatment, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 5292–5296, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. Anjaneyulu and S. Sasikumar, “Bioactive nanocrystalline wollastonite synthesized by sol–gel combustion method by using eggshell waste as calcium source,” Bulletin of Materials Science, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 207–212, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Encinas-Romero, J. Peralta-Haley, J. L. Valenzuela-García, and F. F. Castillón-Barraza, “Synthesis and structural characterization of hydroxyapatite-wollastonite biocomposites, produced by an alternative sol-gel route,” Journal of Biomaterials and Nanobiotechnology, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 327–333, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. S. Owoeye, S. M. Abegunde, D. O. Folorunso, B. O. Adigun, and U. Kingsley, “Microstructure, phase and physical evaluation of non-bioactive wollastonite glass - Ceramic prepared from waste glass by sintering method,” Open Ceramics, vol. 5, article 100062, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Sultana, M. M. Rahman, Z. Yeasmin, S. Ahmed, and F. K. Rony, “Effect of the ratio of eggshell and rice husk as starting materials on the direct synthesis of bioactive wollastonite by solid state thermal method,” Journal of Ceramic Processing Research, vol. 21, pp. 285–295, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Azeena, N. Subhapradha, N. Selvamurugan et al., “Antibacterial activity of agricultural waste derived wollastonite doped with copper for bone tissue engineering,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 71, pp. 1156–1165, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Abd Rashid, R. Shamsudin, M. A. A. Hamid, and A. Jalar, “In-vitro bioactivity of wollastonite materials derived from limestone and silica sand,” Ceramics International, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 6847–6853, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Nour, A. Mostafa, and D. Ibrahim, “Recycled wastes as precursor for synthesizing wollastonite,” Ceramics International, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 101–105, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. M. Ewais, Y. M. Ahmed, A. A. El-Amir, and H. El-Didamony, “Cement kiln dust/rice husk ash as a low temperature route for wollastonite processing,” Epitoanyag-Journal of Silicate Based & Composite Materials, vol. 66, no. 3, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Wang, J. Song, Q. Guo et al., “The environmental sustainability of synthetic wollastonite using waste from zirconium oxychloride production,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 172, pp. 2576–2584, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Shamsudin, F. A. Abdul Azam, M. A. Abdul Hamid, and H. Ismail, “Bioactivity and cell compatibility of β-wollastonite derived from rice husk ash and limestone,” Materials, vol. 10, no. 10, p. 1188, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Getem and N. Gabbiye, “Synthesis and characterization of β–wollastonite from limestone and rice husk as reinforcement filler for clay based ceramic tiles,” in International Conference on Advances of Science and Technology, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
A. H. M. Noor, S. Aziz, S. S. A. Rashid, M. H. M. Zaid, Z. N. Alassan, and K. A. Matori, “Synthesis and characterization of wollastonite glass-ceramics from eggshell and waste glass,” Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, vol. 16, no. 1-2, pp. 1–5, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Morsy, R. Abuelkhair, and T. Elnimr, “Synthesis of microcrystalline wollastonite bioceramics and evolution of bioactivity,” Silicon, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 489–493, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y.-H. Yun, S.-B. Kim, B.-A. Kang, Y.-W. Lee, J.-S. Oh, and K.-S. Hwang, “β-wollastonite reinforced glass-ceramics prepared from waste fluorescent glass and calcium carbonate,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 178, no. 1-3, pp. 61–66, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Amin, A. A. El-Amir, G. Karunakaran, D. Kuznetsov, and E. M. Ewais, “In-vitro evaluation of wollastonite nanopowder produced by a facile process using cheap precursors for biomedical applications,” Ceramics International, vol. 47, no. 13, pp. 18684–18692, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Prabakaran, M. Rajan, Z. Geng, and Y. Liu, “Fabrication of substituted hydroxyapatite-starch-clay bio-composite coated titanium implant for new bone formation,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 271, article 118432, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. S. Chakradhar, B. Nagabhushana, G. Chandrappa, K. Ramesh, and J. Rao, “Solution combustion derived nanocrystalline macroporous wollastonite ceramics,” Materials Chemistry and Physics, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 169–175, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Meiszterics and K. Sinkó, “Sol-gel derived calcium silicate ceramics,” Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, vol. 319, no. 1-3, pp. 143–148, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Kotsis and A. Balogh, “Synthesis of wollastonite,” Ceramics International, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 79–85, 1989.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Bouatrous, F. Bouzerara, A. K. Bhakta, F. Delobel, J. Delhalle, and Z. Mekhalif, “A modified wet chemical synthesis of wollastonite ceramic nanopowders and their characterizations,” Ceramics International, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 12618–12625, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Wu, J. Yang, H. Ma, and M. Wang, “Preparation of acicular wollastonite using hydrothermal and calcining methods,” Integrated Ferroelectrics, vol. 146, no. 1, pp. 144–153, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. V. Nascimento, W. T. Barbosa, R. G. Carrodeguas, M. V. Fook, and M. A. Rodriguez, “Synthesis of wollastonite powders by combustion method: role of amount of fuel,” International Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 2018, Article ID 6213568, 8 pages, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Battafarano, M. Rossi, V. De Martino et al., “Strategies for bone regeneration: from graft to tissue engineering,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 1128, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Liang, Y. Dong, H. Shen et al., “Materials science and design principles of therapeutic materials in orthopedic and bone tissue engineering,” Polymers for Advanced Technologies, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 4573–4586, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. K. Venkatraman, R. Choudhary, K. Genasan et al., “Antibacterial wollastonite supported excellent proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of human bone marrow derived mesenchymal stromal cells,” Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 506–516, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Boccardi, F. E. Ciraldo, and A. R. Boccaccini, “Bioactive glass-ceramic scaffolds: processing and properties,” MRS Bulletin, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 226–232, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Elsayed, A. Zocca, G. Franchin, E. Bernardo, and P. Colombo, “Hardystonite bioceramics from preceramic polymers,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 829–835, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Fu and Y. Zhu, “Organosilicon polymer-derived bioceramics for bone tissue engineering,” Journal Bioanal Biomed, vol. 10, p. e157, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Fiocco, H. Elsayed, J. Daguano, V. Soares, and E. Bernardo, “Silicone resins mixed with active oxide fillers and Ca-Mg Silicate glass as alternative/integrative precursors for wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramic foams,” Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, vol. 416, pp. 44–49, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. A. Dyson, P. G. Genever, K. W. Dalgarno, and D. J. Wood, “Development of custom-built bone scaffolds using mesenchymal stem cells and apatite-wollastonite glass-ceramics,” Tissue engineering, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 2891–2901, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Ge, C. Xun, J. Yang, W. Jia, and Y. Li, “In vivo therapeutic effect of wollastonite and hydroxyapatite on bone defect,” Biomedical Materials, vol. 14, no. 6, article 065013, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. K. Padmanabhan, F. Gervaso, M. Carrozzo, F. Scalera, A. Sannino, and A. Licciulli, “Wollastonite/hydroxyapatite scaffolds with improved mechanical, bioactive and biodegradable properties for bone tissue engineering,” Ceramics International, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 619–627, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. J. Wood, J. Dyson, K. Xiao, K. W. Dalgarno, and P. Genever, “Processing and characterization of apatite-wollastonite porous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering,” in Key Engineering Materials, vol. 361, pp. 923–926, Trans Tech Publications Ltd., 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
C. K. Ong, S. Ray, R. P. Cooney, N. R. Edmonds, and A. J. Easteal, “Preparation and characterization of composites of polyethylene with polypyrrole-coated wollastonite,” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 632–640, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Shao, Y. He, J. Fu et al., “3D printing magnesium-doped wollastonite/β-TCP bioceramics scaffolds with high strength and adjustable degradation,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1495–1503, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Zhang, J. Chang, K. Lin, and J. Lu, “Preparation, mechanical properties and in vitro degradability of wollastonite/tricalcium phosphate macroporous scaffolds from nanocomposite powders,” Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 167–173, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Sun, A. Liu, H. Shao et al., “Systematical evaluation of mechanically strong 3D printed diluted magnesium doping wollastonite scaffolds on osteogenic capacity in rabbit calvarial defects,” Scientific Reports, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Xie, H. Shao, D. He et al., “Ultrahigh strength of three-dimensional printed diluted magnesium doping wollastonite porous scaffolds,” Mrs Communications, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 631–639, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Jin, R. Wu, J. Shen et al., “Nonstoichiometric wollastonite bioceramic scaffolds with core-shell pore struts and adjustable mechanical and biodegradable properties,” Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, vol. 88, pp. 140–149, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Kamboj, M. Aghayan, C. S. Rodrigo-Vazquez, M. A. Rodríguez, and I. Hussainova, “Novel silicon-wollastonite based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering produced by selective laser melting,” Ceramics International, vol. 45, no. 18, pp. 24691–24701, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Kamboj, J. Kazantseva, R. Rahmani, M. A. Rodríguez, and I. Hussainova, “Selective laser sintered bio-inspired silicon-wollastonite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 116, article 111223, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. G. Dellinger, Development of model hydroxyapatite bone scaffolds with multiscale porosity for potential load bearing applications, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2005.
I. Sabree, J. E. Gough, and B. Derby, “Mechanical properties of porous ceramic scaffolds: influence of internal dimensions,” Ceramics International, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 8425–8432, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Li and J. Chang, “Fabrication and characterization of bioactive wollastonite/phbv composite scaffolds,” Biomaterials, vol. 25, no. 24, pp. 5473–5480, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Thein-Han and R. Misra, “Biomimetic chitosan-nanohydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering,” Acta biomaterialia, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1182–1197, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Li and J. Chang, “In vitro degradation of porous degradable and bioactive phbv/wollastonite composite scaffolds,” Polymer Degradation and Stability, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 301–307, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. G. Ribas, T. L. Montanheiro, L. S. Montagna et al., “Water uptake in phbv/wollastonite scaffolds: a kinetics study,” Journal of Composites Science, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 74, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
D. He, C. Zhuang, S. Xu et al., “3D printing of mg-substituted wollastonite reinforcing diopside porous bioceramics with enhanced mechanical and biological performances,” Bioactive materials, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 85–92, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Schmidt, H. Elsayed, E. Bernardo, and P. Colombo, “Digital light processing of wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramic complex structures,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 38, no. 13, pp. 4580–4584, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Baino, D. U. Tulyaganov, Z. Kahharov, A. Rahdar, and E. Verné, “Foam-replicated diopside/fluorapatite/wollastonite-based glass–ceramic scaffolds,” Ceramics, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 120–130, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Fiume, D. Tulyaganov, G. Ubertalli, E. Verné, and F. Baino, “Dolomite-foamed bioactive silicate scaffolds for bone tissue repair,” Materials, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 628, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Curti, I.-C. Stancu, G. Voicu et al., “Development of 3d bioactive scaffolds through 3d printing using wollastonite–gelatin inks,” Polymers, vol. 12, no. 10, p. 2420, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. T. Barbosa, K. V. de Almeida, G. G. de Lima et al., “Synthesis and in vivo evaluation of a scaffold containing wollastonite/β-TCP for bone repair in a rabbit tibial defect model,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B: Applied Biomaterials, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 1107–1116, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. A. Aghdam, E. Sanatizadeh, M. Motififard et al., “Effect of calcium silicate nanoparticle on surface feature of calcium phosphates hybrid bio-nanocomposite using for bone substitute application,” Powder Technology, vol. 361, pp. 917–929, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Baino and C. Vitale-Brovarone, “Wollastonite-containing bioceramic coatings on alumina substrates: design considerations and mechanical modelling,” Ceramics International, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 11464–11470, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. I. Ramli, A. B. Sulong, N. Muhamad, A. Muchtar, and M. Y. Zakaria, “Effect of sintering on the microstructure and mechanical properties of alloy titanium-wollastonite composite fabricated by powder injection moulding process,” Ceramics International, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 11648–11653, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Tcacencu, N. Rodrigues, N. Alharbi et al., “Osseointegration of porous apatite-wollastonite and poly(lactic acid) composite structures created using 3D printing techniques,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 90, pp. 1–7, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. H. Aly, L. A. A. Mohammed, S. Al-Meer, K. Elsaid, and N. A. Barakat, “Preparation and characterization of wollastonite/titanium oxide nanofiber bioceramic composite as a future implant material,” Ceramics International, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 11525–11534, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Elsayed, P. Colombo, and E. Bernardo, “Direct ink writing of wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramic scaffolds from a silicone resin and engineered fillers,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 37, no. 13, pp. 4187–4195, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Shen, X. Yang, R. Wu et al., “Direct ink writing core-shell [email protected] scaffolds with tailorable shell micropores favorable for optimizing physicochemical and biodegradation properties,” Journal of the European Ceramic Society, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 503–512, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Melo, A.-M. Ferreira, K. Waldron et al., “Osteoinduction of 3D printed particulate and short-fibre reinforced composites produced using plla and apatite-wollastonite,” Composites Science and Technology, vol. 184, article 107834, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Papynov, O. Shichalin, V. Apanasevich et al., “Synthetic nanostructured wollastonite: Composition, structure and " in vitro " biocompatibility investigation,” Ceramics International, vol. 47, no. 16, pp. 22487–22496, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Papynov, O. Shichalin, V. Y. Mayorov et al., “Sol-gel and sps combined synthesis of highly porous wollastonite ceramic materials with immobilized au-nps,” Ceramics International, vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 8509–8516, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. P. Solonenko, A. I. Blesman, and D. A. Polonyankin, “Preparation and in vitro apatite-forming ability of hydroxyapatite and β-wollastonite composite materials,” Ceramics International, vol. 44, no. 15, pp. 17824–17834, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Wu, Y. Li, M. Shen et al., “Bone tissue regeneration: the role of finely tuned pore architecture of bioactive scaffolds before clinical translation,” Bioactive Materials, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 1242–1254, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Mansoor and S. Dasharath, “Synthesis and characterization of wollastonite (casio3)/titanium oxide (tio2) and hydroxyapatite (ha) ceramic composites for bio-medical applications fabricated by spark plasma sintering technology,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 45, pp. 332–337, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Ballarre, R. Seltzer, E. Mendoza et al., “Morphologic and nanomechanical characterization of bone tissue growth around bioactive sol-gel coatings containing wollastonite particles applied on stainless steel implants,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 545–552, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. O. Soares, J. K. Daguano, C. B. Lombello, O. S. Bianchin, L. M. Gonçalves, and E. D. Zanotto, “New sintered wollastonite glass-ceramic for biomedical applications,” Ceramics International, vol. 44, no. 16, pp. 20019–20027, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. De Aza, F. Guitian, S. De Aza, and F. Valle, “Analytical control of wollastonite for biomedical applications by use of atomic absorption spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry,” Analyst, vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 681–685, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Ç. Vakıfahmetoğlu, J. Park, F. Korkusuz, A. Öztürk, and M. Timuçin, Production and properties of apatite wollastonite ceramics for biomedical applications, Interceram, 2009.
W. C. Xue, X. Y. Liu, X. B. Zheng, and C. X. Ding, “Plasma-sprayed wollastonite coatings for biomedical application,” in Materials Science Forum, Trans Tech Publications Ltd., 2005.
View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Chirotaw Getem Zenebe. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

916

Downloads

769

Citations