10.1007/s40204-014-0031-x

Injectable scaffold as minimally invasive technique for cartilage tissue engineering: in vitro and in vivo preliminary study

HTML PDF
  • Atefeh Solouk1,
  • Hamid Mirzadeh*2,
  • Saeed Amanpour3,
  1. Biomedical Engineering Faculty, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, IR
  2. Polymer Engineering Faculty, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, IR
  3. Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute of Iran, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR
Cover Image

Published in Issue 2014-12-09

How to Cite

Solouk, A., Mirzadeh, H., & Amanpour, S. (2014). Injectable scaffold as minimally invasive technique for cartilage tissue engineering: in vitro and in vivo preliminary study. Progress in Biomaterials, 3(2-4 (December 2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40204-014-0031-x
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract Cartilage is a tissue with limited repair capacity and also sparse population of cells entrapped within a dense extracellular matrix, therefore, delivery of the cells to site of damaged cartilage can improve its healing potential. Synthetic biomaterials such as poly ( d,l -lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) have been used as both preformed or injectable scaffolds in tissue engineering in order to carry and keep cells in the site of injury with minimal side effects. The injectable biocompatible polymeric scaffolds can reach to effected area via minimally invasive injection without need to open the joint, less painful approach and also having possibility to fill complicated shape defects. In this study, it was hypothesized that PLGA solved in n -methyl pyrrolidine (NMP) may act as a proper carrier for cell delivery to the site of the damage and also supports their growth. The results of in vitro assays including both live/dead (AO/PI) and MTT showed the majority of the cells were remained alive between 3 up to 21 days, respectively. The amount of resealed GAG from the mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) which were in contact with both PLGA and alginate constructs (used as control) indicated that for day 7 MSCs in contact with alginate secreted more GAG (3.45 ± 0.453 µg/mL for alginate and 2.36 ± 0.422 µg/mL for PLGA matrices), but at longer times (21 days) cells in contact with PLGA elicited more GAG (6.26 ± 0.968 µg/mL for alginate and 8.47 ± 0.871 µg/mL for the PLGA matrices). Sol–gel systems comprising PLGA, NMP, and cells as well as alginate/cells were subcutaneously injected into four nude mice (each mouse had three injection sites). PLGA/NMP was solidify immediately and formed an interconnecting 3-D porous structure that allowed body fluid to penetrate through them. In vivo evaluation showed that PLGA/NMP scaffolds could support injected cells as a fibrocartilage tissue was formed after 6 months of injection. We found that PLGA/NMP system might be a proper minimally invasive therapeutics option for cartilage repair.

Keywords

  • Cartilage tissue engineering,
  • Injectable scaffolds,
  • poly (d,l-lactide-co-glycolide),
  • Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)
HTML PDF

References

  1. Annabi et al. (2011) The effect of elastin on chondrocyte adhesion and proliferation on poly (3-caprolactone)/elastin composites (pp. 1517-1525) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.10.024
  2. Astaneh et al. (2009) Changes in morphology of in situ forming PLGA implant, prepared by different polymer molecular weight and its effect on release behavior (pp. 135-145) https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.21415
  3. Astm (1996) ASTM International
  4. Bakhshi and Vasheghani-Farahani (2006) The effect of additives on naltrexone hydrochloride release and solvent removal rate from an injectable in situ forming PLGA implant (pp. 354-364) https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.717
  5. Capito et al. (2005) Regeneration of articular cartilage (pp. 91-123)
  6. Carter et al. (1988) Correlations between mechanical stress history and tissue differentiation in initial fracture healing (pp. 736-748) https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100060517
  7. Chang et al. (2001) Injection molding of chondrocyte/alginate constructs in the shape of facial implants (pp. 503-511) https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4636(20010615)55:4<503::AID-JBM1043>3.0.CO;2-S
  8. Dai et al. (2010) The influence of structural design of PLGA/collagen hybrid scaffolds in cartilage tissue engineering (pp. 2141-2152) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.11.070
  9. Duncan and Turner (1995) Mechanotransduction and the functional response of bone to mechanical strain (pp. 344-358) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302070
  10. Fan et al. (2006) Cartilage regeneration using mesenchymal stem cells and a PLGA—gelatin/chondroitin/hyaluronate hybrid scaffold (pp. 4573-4580) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.04.013
  11. Farahani et al. (2005) Degradation of poly (d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) 50:50 implant in aqueous medium (pp. 753-763)
  12. Francisco et al. (2013) Injectable laminin-functionalized hydrogel for nucleus pulposus regeneration (pp. 7381-7388) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.06.038
  13. Hao and Wen (2010) The support of matrix accumulation and the promotion of sheep articular cartilage defects repair in vivo by chitosan hydrogels (pp. 257-265) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2009.08.007
  14. Hu et al. (2008) Preparation and properties of an injectable scaffold of poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microparticles/chitosan hydrogel (pp. 352-359) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2008.02.001
  15. Ibusuki et al. (2003) Tissue-engineered cartilage using an injectable and in situ gelable thermoresponsive gelatin: fabrication and in vitro performance (pp. 371-384) https://doi.org/10.1089/107632703764664846
  16. Jia and Kiick (2009) Hybrid Multicomponent Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering (pp. 140-156) https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.200800284
  17. Jin et al. (2003) Combined effects of dynamic tissue shear deformation and insulin-like growth factor I on chondrocyte biosynthesis in cartilage explants (pp. 223-231) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9861(03)00195-4
  18. Karbasi et al. (2005) A comparison between cell viability of chondrocytes on a biodegradable polyester urethane scaffold and alginate beads in different oxygen tension and pH (pp. 823-830)
  19. Karkhaneh et al. (2014) Effects of hydrostatic pressure on biosynthetic activity during chondrogenic differentiation of MSCs in hybrid scaffolds (pp. 142-148) https://doi.org/10.5301/ijao.5000288
  20. Kreuz et al. (2013) Scaffold-assisted cartilage tissue engineering using infant chondrocytes from human hip cartilage (pp. 1997-2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2013.09.007
  21. Lara-Curzio and Readey (2004) 28th International conference on advanced ceramics and composites (pp. 4-12)
  22. Marijnissen et al. (2002) Alginate as a chondrocyte-delivery substance in combination with a non-woven scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering 23(6) (pp. 1511-1517) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00281-2
  23. Mercier et al. (2004) A novel injectable approach for cartilage formation in vivo using PLG microspheres (pp. 418-429) https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ABME.0000017547.84146.fd
  24. Mercier et al. (2005) Poly (lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres as a moldable scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering (pp. 1945-1952) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.06.030
  25. Migliaresi et al. (2007) (pp. 95-109) Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-366-6_7
  26. Park et al. (2005) Delivery of TGF-beta1 and chondrocytes via injectable, biodegradable hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering applications (pp. 7095-7103) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.05.083
  27. Park et al. (2005) Delivery of TGF-beta1 and chondrocytes via injectable, biodegradable hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering applications (pp. 7095-7103) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.05.083
  28. Park et al. (2007) Injectable biodegradable hydrogel composites for rabbit marrow mesenchymal stem cell and growth factor delivery for cartilage tissue engineering (pp. 3217-3227) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.03.030
  29. Parka et al. (2013) njectable chitosan hyaluronic acid hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering (pp. 4779-4786) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2012.08.033
  30. Puppi and Chiellini (2010) Polymeric materials for bone and cartilage repair (pp. 403-440) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.01.006
  31. Sah et al. (2003) A novel two-step method for the formation of tissue-engineered cartilage by mature bovine chondrocytes: the alginate-recovered-chondrocyte (ARC) method (pp. 139-148) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0736-0266(02)00109-2
  32. Shafiee and Soleimani (2011) Electrospun nanofiber-based regeneration of cartilage enhanced by mesenchymal stem cells (pp. 467-478)
  33. Southgate et al. (2009) The relationship between the mechanical properties and cell behaviour on PLGA and PCL scaffolds for bladder tissue engineering (pp. 1321-1328) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.11.033
  34. Sung et al. (2004) The effect of scaffold degradation rate on three-dimensional cell growth and angiogenesis (pp. 5735-5742) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.01.066
  35. Tiğli and Gümüşderelioğlu (2009) Evaluation of alginate-chitosan semi IPNs as cartilage scaffolds (pp. 699-709) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-008-3624-x
  36. Vinatier and Mrugala (2009) Cartilage engineering/; a crucial combination of cells, biomaterials and biofactors (pp. 5-15)
  37. Yuehuei H, Kylie Martin L (2010) Handbook of histology methods for bone and cartilage
  38. Zilberman (2011) Active implants and scaffolds for tissue regeneration (pp. 231-235)