L Wang1, M Lazebnik, M S Detamore. 1. Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare temporomandibular joint (TMJ) condylar cartilage cells in vitro to hyaline cartilage cells cultured in a three-dimensional (3D) environment for tissue engineering of mandibular condylar cartilage. DESIGN: Mandibular condylar cartilage and hyaline cartilage cells were harvested from pigs and cultured for 6 weeks in polyglycolic acid (PGA) scaffolds. Both types of cells were treated with glucosamine sulfate (0.4 mM), insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) (100 ng/ml) and their combination. At weeks 0 and 6, cell number, glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and collagen content were determined, types I and II collagen were visualized by immunohistochemistry and GAGs were visualized by histology. RESULTS: Hyaline cartilage cells produced from half an order to a full order of magnitude more GAGs and collagen than mandibular condylar cartilage cells in 3D culture. IGF-I was a highly effective signal for biosynthesis with hyaline cartilage cells, while glucosamine sulfate decreased cell proliferation and biosynthesis with both types of cells. In vitro culture of TMJ condylar cartilage cells produced a fibrous tissue with predominantly type I collagen, while hyaline cartilage cells formed a fibrocartilage-like tissue with types I and II collagen. The combination of IGF and glucosamine had a synergistic effect on maintaining the phenotype of TMJ condylar cells to generate both types I and II collagen. CONCLUSION: Given the superior biosynthetic activity by hyaline cartilage cells and the practical surgical limitations of harvesting cells from the TMJ of a patient requiring TMJ reconstruction, cartilage cells from elsewhere in the body may be a potentially better alternative to cells harvested from the TMJ for TMJ tissue engineering. This finding may also apply to other fibrocartilages such as the intervertebral disc and knee meniscus in applications where a mature cartilage cell source is desired.
OBJECTIVE: To compare temporomandibular joint (TMJ) condylar cartilage cells in vitro to hyaline cartilage cells cultured in a three-dimensional (3D) environment for tissue engineering of mandibular condylar cartilage. DESIGN: Mandibular condylar cartilage and hyaline cartilage cells were harvested from pigs and cultured for 6 weeks in polyglycolic acid (PGA) scaffolds. Both types of cells were treated with glucosamine sulfate (0.4 mM), insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) (100 ng/ml) and their combination. At weeks 0 and 6, cell number, glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and collagen content were determined, types I and II collagen were visualized by immunohistochemistry and GAGs were visualized by histology. RESULTS: Hyaline cartilage cells produced from half an order to a full order of magnitude more GAGs and collagen than mandibular condylar cartilage cells in 3D culture. IGF-I was a highly effective signal for biosynthesis with hyaline cartilage cells, while glucosamine sulfate decreased cell proliferation and biosynthesis with both types of cells. In vitro culture of TMJ condylar cartilage cells produced a fibrous tissue with predominantly type I collagen, while hyaline cartilage cells formed a fibrocartilage-like tissue with types I and II collagen. The combination of IGF and glucosamine had a synergistic effect on maintaining the phenotype of TMJ condylar cells to generate both types I and II collagen. CONCLUSION: Given the superior biosynthetic activity by hyaline cartilage cells and the practical surgical limitations of harvesting cells from the TMJ of a patient requiring TMJ reconstruction, cartilage cells from elsewhere in the body may be a potentially better alternative to cells harvested from the TMJ for TMJ tissue engineering. This finding may also apply to other fibrocartilages such as the intervertebral disc and knee meniscus in applications where a mature cartilage cell source is desired.
Authors: Brandon J DeKosky; Nathan H Dormer; Ganesh C Ingavle; Christopher H Roatch; Joseph Lomakin; Michael S Detamore; Stevin H Gehrke Journal: Tissue Eng Part C Methods Date: 2010-07-13 Impact factor: 3.056
Authors: Bryan N Brown; William L Chung; Alejandro J Almarza; Matthew D Pavlick; Serafim N Reppas; Mark W Ochs; Alan J Russell; Stephen F Badylak Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2012-02-25 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Timothy M Acri; Kyungsup Shin; Dongrim Seol; Noah Z Laird; Ino Song; Sean M Geary; Jaidev L Chakka; James A Martin; Aliasger K Salem Journal: Adv Healthc Mater Date: 2018-12-17 Impact factor: 9.933