-
Biomaterials Apr 2011Biologic scaffold materials composed of extracellular matrix (ECM) are typically derived by processes that involve decellularization of tissues or organs. Preservation... (Review)
Review
Biologic scaffold materials composed of extracellular matrix (ECM) are typically derived by processes that involve decellularization of tissues or organs. Preservation of the complex composition and three-dimensional ultrastructure of the ECM is highly desirable but it is recognized that all methods of decellularization result in disruption of the architecture and potential loss of surface structure and composition. Physical methods and chemical and biologic agents are used in combination to lyse cells, followed by rinsing to remove cell remnants. Effective decellularization methodology is dictated by factors such as tissue density and organization, geometric and biologic properties desired for the end product, and the targeted clinical application. Tissue decellularization with preservation of ECM integrity and bioactivity can be optimized by making educated decisions regarding the agents and techniques utilized during processing. An overview of decellularization methods, their effect upon resulting ECM structure and composition, and recently described perfusion techniques for whole organ decellularization techniques are presented herein.
Topics: Animals; Extracellular Matrix; Organ Specificity; Sterilization; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 21296410
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.057 -
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2016Over centuries, the field of regenerative skin tissue engineering has had several advancements to facilitate faster wound healing and thereby restoration of skin. Skin... (Review)
Review
Over centuries, the field of regenerative skin tissue engineering has had several advancements to facilitate faster wound healing and thereby restoration of skin. Skin tissue regeneration is mainly based on the use of suitable scaffold matrices. There are several scaffold types, such as porous, fibrous, microsphere, hydrogel, composite and acellular, etc., with discrete advantages and disadvantages. These scaffolds are either made up of highly biocompatible natural biomaterials, such as collagen, chitosan, etc., or synthetic materials, such as polycaprolactone (PCL), and poly-ethylene-glycol (PEG), etc. Composite scaffolds, which are a combination of natural or synthetic biomaterials, are highly biocompatible with improved tensile strength for effective skin tissue regeneration. Appropriate knowledge of the properties, advantages and disadvantages of various biomaterials and scaffolds will accelerate the production of suitable scaffolds for skin tissue regeneration applications. At the same time, emphasis on some of the leading challenges in the field of skin tissue engineering, such as cell interaction with scaffolds, faster cellular proliferation/differentiation, and vascularization of engineered tissues, is inevitable. In this review, we discuss various types of scaffolding approaches and biomaterials used in the field of skin tissue engineering and more importantly their future prospects in skin tissue regeneration efforts.
Topics: Biocompatible Materials; Polymers; Skin; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds; Wound Healing
PubMed: 27898014
DOI: 10.3390/ijms17121974 -
Organogenesis Dec 2022Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) have been reported to be able to differentiate to hepatocyte in vitro with varying degree of...
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) have been reported to be able to differentiate to hepatocyte in vitro with varying degree of hepatocyte maturation. A simple method to decellularize liver scaffold has been established by the Department of Histology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, in SCTE IMERI lab. This study aims to evaluate hepatocyte differentiation from iPSCs compared to MSCs derived in our decellularized liver scaffold. The research stages started with iPSC culture, decellularization, seeding cell culture into the scaffold, and differentiation into hepatocytes for 21 days. Hepatocyte differentiation from iPSCs and MSCs in the scaffolds was characterized using hematoxylin-eosin, Masson Trichrome, and immunohistochemistry staining to determine the fraction of the differentiation area. RNA samples were isolated on days 7 and 21. Expression of albumin, CYP450, and CK-19 genes were analyzed using the qRT-PCR method. Electron microscopy images were obtained by SEM. Immunofluorescence examination was done using HNF4-α and CEBPA markers. The results of this study in hepatocyte-differentiated iPSCs compared with hepatocyte-differentiated MSCs in decellularized liver scaffold showed lower adhesion capacity, single-cell-formation and adhered less abundant, decreased trends of albumin, and lower CYP450 expression. Several factors contribute to this result: lower initial seeding number, which causes only a few iPSCs to attach to certain parts of decellularized liver scaffold, and manual syringe injection for recellularization, which abruptly and unevenly creates pattern of single-cell-formation by hepatocyte-differentiated iPSC in the scaffold. Hepatocyte-differentiated MSCs have the advantage of higher adhesion capacity to collagen fiber decellularized liver scaffold. This leads to positive result: increase trends of albumin and higher CYP450 expression. Hepatocyte maturation is shown by diminishing CK-19, which is more prominent in hepatocyte-differentiated iPSCs in decellularized liver scaffold. Confirmation of mature hepatocyte-differentiated iPSCs in decellularized liver scaffold maturation is positive for HNF4-a and CEBPA. The conclusion of this study is hepatocyte-differentiated iPSCs in decellularized liver scaffold is mature with lower cell-ECM adhesion, spatial cell distribution, albumin, and CYP450 expression than hepatocyte-differentiated MSCs in decellularized liver scaffold.
Topics: Albumins; Cell Differentiation; Hepatocytes; Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells; Liver; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 35435152
DOI: 10.1080/15476278.2022.2061263 -
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage Dec 2022Articular cartilage (AC) has limited capacity for repair. The first attempt to repair cartilage using tissue engineering was reported in 1977. Since then, cell-based... (Review)
Review
Articular cartilage (AC) has limited capacity for repair. The first attempt to repair cartilage using tissue engineering was reported in 1977. Since then, cell-based interventions have entered clinical practice in orthopaedics, and several tissue engineering approaches to repair cartilage are in the translational pipeline towards clinical application. Classically, these involve a scaffold, substrate or matrix to provide structure, and cells such as chondrocytes or mesenchymal stromal cells to generate the tissue. We discuss the advantages and drawbacks of the use of various cell types, natural and synthetic scaffolds, multiphasic or gradient-based scaffolds, and self-organizing or self-assembling scaffold-free systems, for the engineering of cartilage constructs. Several challenges persist including achieving zonal tissue organization and integration with the surrounding tissue upon implantation. Approaches to improve cartilage thickness, organization and mechanical properties include mechanical stimulation, culture under hypoxic conditions, and stimulation with growth factors or other macromolecules. In addition, advanced technologies such as bioreactors, biosensors and 3D bioprinting are actively being explored. Understanding the underlying mechanisms of action of cell therapy and tissue engineering approaches will help improve and refine therapy development. Finally, we discuss recent studies of the intrinsic cellular and molecular mechanisms of cartilage repair that have identified novel signals and targets and are inspiring the development of molecular therapies to enhance the recruitment and cartilage reparative activity of joint-resident stem and progenitor cells. A one-fits-all solution is unrealistic, and identifying patients who will respond to a specific targeted treatment will be critical.
Topics: Humans; Tissue Engineering; Chondrocytes; Cartilage, Articular; Mesenchymal Stem Cells; Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 36150678
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2022.07.012 -
International Journal of Molecular... Dec 2022The treatment of bone defects remains one of the major challenges in modern clinical practice. Nowadays, with the increased incidence of bone disease in an aging... (Review)
Review
The treatment of bone defects remains one of the major challenges in modern clinical practice. Nowadays, with the increased incidence of bone disease in an aging population, the demand for materials to repair bone defects continues to grow. Recent advances in the development of biomaterials offer new possibilities for exploring modern bone tissue engineering strategies. Both natural and synthetic biomaterials have been used for tissue repair. A variety of porous structures that promote cell adhesion, differentiation, and proliferation enable better implant integration with increasingly better physical properties. The selection of a suitable biomaterial on which the patient's new tissue will grow is one of the key issues when designing a modern tissue scaffold and planning the entire treatment process. The purpose of this article is to present a comprehensive literature review of existing and novel biomaterials used in the surgical treatment of bone tissue defects. The materials described are divided into three groups-organic, inorganic, and synthetic polymers-taking into account current trends. This review highlights different types of existing and novel natural and synthetic materials used in bone tissue engineering and their advantages and disadvantages for bone defects regeneration.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Biocompatible Materials; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds; Bone and Bones; Bone Regeneration
PubMed: 36613972
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24010529 -
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2021The extracellular matrix (ECM) has pleiotropic effects, ranging from cell adhesion to cell survival. In tissue engineering, the use of ECM and ECM-like scaffolds has... (Review)
Review
The extracellular matrix (ECM) has pleiotropic effects, ranging from cell adhesion to cell survival. In tissue engineering, the use of ECM and ECM-like scaffolds has separated the field into two distinct areas-scaffold-based and scaffold-free. Scaffold-free techniques are used in creating reproducible cell aggregates which have massive potential for high-throughput, reproducible drug screening and disease modeling. Though, the lack of ECM prevents certain cells from surviving and proliferating. Thus, tissue engineers use scaffolds to mimic the native ECM and produce organotypic models which show more reliability in disease modeling. However, scaffold-based techniques come at a trade-off of reproducibility and throughput. To bridge the tissue engineering dichotomy, we posit that finding novel ways to incorporate the ECM in scaffold-free cultures can synergize these two disparate techniques.
Topics: Animals; Biomimetics; Cell Adhesion; Cell Differentiation; Cell Survival; Extracellular Matrix; Humans; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 34884495
DOI: 10.3390/ijms222312690 -
Tissue Engineering. Part A Oct 2017Suppression of the recipient immune response is a common component of tissue and organ transplantation strategies and has also been used as a method of mitigating the... (Review)
Review
Suppression of the recipient immune response is a common component of tissue and organ transplantation strategies and has also been used as a method of mitigating the inflammatory and scar tissue response to many biomaterials. It is now recognized, however, that long-term functional tissue replacement not only benefits from an intact host immune response but also depends upon such a response. The present article reviews the limitations associated with the traditionally held view of avoiding the immune response, the ability of acellular biologic scaffold materials to modulate the host immune response and promote a functional tissue replacement outcome, and current strategies within the fields of tissue engineering and biomaterials to develop immune-responsive and immunoregulatory biomaterials.
Topics: Animals; Biocompatible Materials; Extracellular Matrix; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunosuppression Therapy; Organ Transplantation; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 28457179
DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2016.0538 -
Nanomedicine (London, England) Jul 2019
Topics: Animals; Humans; Nanomedicine; Nanostructures; Nanotechnology; Printing, Three-Dimensional; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 31298066
DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2019-0134 -
Advanced Materials (Deerfield Beach,... Dec 2016Repair of damaged skeletal-muscle tissue is limited by the regenerative capacity of the native tissue. Current clinical approaches are not optimal for the treatment of... (Review)
Review
Repair of damaged skeletal-muscle tissue is limited by the regenerative capacity of the native tissue. Current clinical approaches are not optimal for the treatment of large volumetric skeletal-muscle loss. As an alternative, tissue engineering represents a promising approach for the functional restoration of damaged muscle tissue. A typical tissue-engineering process involves the design and fabrication of a scaffold that closely mimics the native skeletal-muscle extracellular matrix (ECM), allowing organization of cells into a physiologically relevant 3D architecture. In particular, anisotropic materials that mimic the morphology of the native skeletal-muscle ECM, can be fabricated using various biocompatible materials to guide cell alignment, elongation, proliferation, and differentiation into myotubes. Here, an overview of fundamental concepts associated with muscle-tissue engineering and the current status of muscle-tissue-engineering approaches is provided. Recent advances in the development of anisotropic scaffolds with micro- or nanoscale features are reviewed, and how scaffold topographical, mechanical, and biochemical cues correlate to observed cellular function and phenotype development is examined. Finally, some recent developments in both the design and utility of anisotropic materials in skeletal-muscle-tissue engineering are highlighted, along with their potential impact on future research and clinical applications.
Topics: Animals; Biocompatible Materials; Cell Differentiation; Extracellular Matrix; Humans; Muscle Fibers, Skeletal; Muscle, Skeletal; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 27865007
DOI: 10.1002/adma.201600240 -
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative... Jun 2022The oral and maxillofacial region contains oral organs and facial soft tissues. Due to the complexity of the structures and functions of this region, the repair of... (Review)
Review
The oral and maxillofacial region contains oral organs and facial soft tissues. Due to the complexity of the structures and functions of this region, the repair of related defects is complicated. Different degrees of defects require different repair methods, which involve a great combination of medicine and art, and the material requirements are extremely high. Hence, clinicians are plagued by contemporary oral repair materials due to the limitations of bone harvesting, immune rejection, low osteogenic activity and other problems. Decellularized extracellular matrix has attracted much attention as a bioactive scaffold material because of its nonimmunogenic properties, good osteogenic properties, slow release of growth factors, promotion of seed cell adhesion and maintenance of stem cell characteristics. This article reviews the sources, preparation methods, application and research progress of extracellular matrix materials in the repair of oral and maxillofacial defects to provide an overview for fundamental research and clinical development.
Topics: Bone and Bones; Extracellular Matrix; Oral Medicine; Osteogenesis; Tissue Scaffolds
PubMed: 35320505
DOI: 10.1007/s13770-022-00432-w