Drug Design, Development and Therapy (Aug 2021)
Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles Facilitate Osteoblast Differentiation and Bone Formation Within Sagittal Suture During Expansion in Rats [Corrigendum]
Abstract
Liang W, Ding P, Li G, Lu E, Zhao Z. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2021;15:905– 917. Page 908, Animal Model section, line 3 from the bottom, the text “ 100 μg/mL” should read “ 25 μg/mL”. Figure 1D and E on page 909 is incorrect. The correct Figure 1 is shown in Download Article. Figure 1 Characterization and differentiation of suture-derived stem cells (SuSCs). (A) Schematic illustration of holes made on the parietal bone to place the expansion appliance and absorbable collagen sponge. (B) Oil red staining indicated lipid restoration in SuSCs after cultured in lipid-forming medium for 21 days; white arrows indicate oil drop scale bar, 200 μm. (C) Alizarin red S staining of SuSCs cultured in osteogenic medium at day 14; white arrows indicate calcium nodules scale bar, 100 μm. (D) Flow cytometry analysis shows that SuSCs are expressing markers CD11b/c (75.00%), CD29 (19.94%) and CD90 (81.89), but (E) not expressing markers CD34 (0.30%), CD44 (0.25%), CD45 (0.29%) and CD73 (0.29%). Page 910, Characteristics of Synthesized nHAP section, second to last sentence, the text “Moreover, based on the XRD pattern, we identified that the crystallinity degree of nHAP was 76 ± 3.6%” should read “Moreover, based on the XRD pattern, we identified that the crystallinity degree of nHAP was 76 ± 3.6% (Figure 2C)”. Page 910, Characterization of Isolated SuSCs section, second sentence, the text “Flow cytometric characterization analysis showed that the SuSCs were homogenously positive (Figure 1D) for CD90 (94.54%), CD29 (75.12%) and CD11b/c (90.81%) and negative (Figure 1E) for CD34 (1.56%), CD44 (1.35%), CD45 (1.00%) and CD73 (9.32%)” should read “Flow cytometric characterization analysis showed that the SuSCs were homogenously positive (Figure 1D) for CD90 (81.89%), CD29 (19.94%) and CD11b/c (75.00%) and negative (Figure 1E) for CD34 (0.30%), CD44 (0.25%), CD45 (0.29%) and CD73 (0.29%)”. The authors apologize for these errors and advise they do not affect the conclusion of the paper. Read the original article
