The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Biological Evaluation of Chitosan Nanofiber Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration
Abstract
Background: Chitosan is known as a biodegradable and non‐toxic natural polymer that enhances wound healing and bone formation. The aims of this study are to evaluate the biocompatibility of chitosan nanofiber membranes and to examine the effect of the chitosan nanofiber membranes on bone regeneration in rabbit calvarial defects. Methods: In vitro cell proliferation tests using human osteosarcoma cell line MG63 and reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) to evaluate the expression of alkaline phosphatase (ALP), collagen, osteocalcin (OCN), and GAPDH were done on chitosan nanofiber membranes. Chitosan nanofiber membranes were implanted in subcutaneous connective tissue and observed for 2, 4, and 6 weeks in rats. Ten‐millimeter diameter round cranial defects were made in rabbits and covered by chitosan nanofiber membranes for 4 weeks. Specimens were decalcified and observed by a light microscope. Results: MG63 cells proliferated for 28 days on the chitosan nanofiber membranes and expressed ALP, collagen, OCN, and GAPDH at 2 weeks. Chitosan nanofiber membranes that were grafted into rat subcutaneous tissue maintained their shape and space for bone regeneration for as long as 6 weeks. No inflammation could be seen on the membrane surface or in the surrounding tissues. In the rabbit calvarial defects, new bone filled the defects and fused to the original old bone in 4 weeks. Conclusions: The biocompatibility of the chitosan nanofiber membrane was confirmed, with enhanced bone regeneration and no evidence of an inflammatory reaction. This experiment shows that the novel biodegradable chitosan nanofiber membrane may be useful as a tool for guided bone regeneration.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Guided bone regeneration: materials and biological mechanisms revisited
Elgali, I., Omar, O., Dahlin, C., & Thomsen, P. (2017) · European Journal of Oral Sciences · doi:10.1111/eos.12364 · Cited by 848
Electrospun materials as potential platforms for bone tissue engineering
Jang, J.-H., Castano, O., & Kim, H.-W. (2009) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2009.07.008 · Cited by 493
Dimitriou, R., Mataliotakis, G. I., Calori, G. M., & Giannoudis, P. V. (2012) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-81 · Cited by 398
Scaffolds based bone tissue engineering: the role of chitosan
Costa-Pinto, A. R., Reis, R. L., & Neves, N. M. (2011) · Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews · doi:10.1089/ten.teb.2010.0704 · Cited by 355
Applications of chitin and chitosan nanofibers in bone regenerative engineering
Tao, F., Cheng, Y., Shi, X., Zheng, H., Du, Y., Xiang, W., & Deng, H. (2020) · Carbohydrate Polymers · doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.115658 · Cited by 341
Metadata
- Authors
- Shin, S., Park, H., Kim, K., Lee, M., Choi, Y. S., Park, Y., Lee, Y., Ku, Y., Rhyu, I., Han, S., Lee, S., & Chung, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Periodontology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1778-1784
- ISSN
- 0022-3492 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-3670
- OpenAlex
- W2012777460
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biological Evaluation of Chitosan Nanofiber Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1902/jop.2005.76.10.1778
- The paper
- Shin, S., Park, H., Kim, K., Lee, M., Choi, Y. S., Park, Y., Lee, Y., Ku, Y., Rhyu, I., Han, S., Lee, S., & Chung, C. (2005). Biological Evaluation of Chitosan Nanofiber Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration. Journal of Periodontology. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.10.1778
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.