Literature DB >> 19438301

High-resolution 1.5-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging for tissue-engineered constructs: a noninvasive tool to assess three-dimensional scaffold architecture and cell seeding.

Marie Poirier-Quinot1, Guillaume Frasca, Claire Wilhelm, Nathalie Luciani, Jean-Christophe Ginefri, Luc Darrasse, Didier Letourneur, Catherine Le Visage, Florence Gazeau.   

Abstract

Tissue-engineered scaffolds are made of biocompatible polymers with various structures, allowing cell seeding, growth, and differentiation. Noninvasive imaging methods are needed to study tissue-engineered constructs before and after implantation. Here, we show that high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed on a clinical 1.5-T device is a reliable technique to assess three-dimensional structures of porous scaffolds and to validate cell-seeding procedures. A high-temperature superconducting detection coil was used to achieve a resolution of 30 x 30 x 30 microm(3) when imaging the scaffolds. Three types of structures with tuneable architectures were prepared from naturally derived polysaccharides and evaluated as scaffolds for mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) culture. To monitor cell seeding, MSCs were magnetically labeled using simple incubation with anionic citrate-coated iron-oxide nanoparticles for 30 min. Iron uptake was quantified using single-cell magnetophoresis, and cell proliferation was checked for 7 days after labeling. Three-dimensional (3D) microstructures of scaffolds were assessed using MRI, revealing lamellar or globular porous organization according to the scaffold preparation process. MSCs with different iron load (5, 12 and 31 pg of iron per cell) were seeded on scaffolds at low density (132 cells/mm(3)) and detected on 3D gradient-echo MR images according to phase distortions and areas of intensely low signal, whose size increased with cell iron load and echo time. Overall signal loss in the scaffold correlated with the number of seeded cells and their iron load. Different organizations of cells were observed depending on the scaffold architecture. After subcutaneous implantation in mice, scaffolds seeded with labeled cells could be distinguished in vivo from scaffold with nonlabeled cells by observation of signal and phase heterogeneities and by measuring the global signal loss. High-resolution 1.5-T MRI combined with efficient intracellular contrast agents shows promise for noninvasive 3D visualization of tissue-engineered constructs before and after in vivo implantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19438301     DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEC.2009.0015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods        ISSN: 1937-3384            Impact factor:   3.056


  9 in total

1.  Label-free magnetic resonance imaging to locate live cells in three-dimensional porous scaffolds.

Authors:  A Abarrategi; M E Fernandez-Valle; T Desmet; D Castejón; A Civantos; C Moreno-Vicente; V Ramos; J V Sanz-Casado; F J Martínez-Vázquez; P Dubruel; P Miranda; J L López-Lacomba
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Nondestructive Monitoring of Degradable Scaffold-Based Tissue-Engineered Blood Vessel Development Using Optical Coherence Tomography.

Authors:  Wanwen Chen; Shangmin Liu; Junqing Yang; Yueheng Wu; Wentao Ma; Zhanyi Lin
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Determining the fate of seeded cells in venous tissue-engineered vascular grafts using serial MRI.

Authors:  Jamie K Harrington; Halima Chahboune; Jason M Criscione; Alice Y Li; Narutoshi Hibino; Tai Yi; Gustavo A Villalona; Serge Kobsa; Dane Meijas; Daniel R Duncan; Lesley Devine; Xenophon Papademetri; Toshiharu Shin'oka; Tarek M Fahmy; Christopher K Breuer
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2011-08-16       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Mesenchymal stem cell delivery into rat infarcted myocardium using a porous polysaccharide-based scaffold: a quantitative comparison with endocardial injection.

Authors:  Catherine Le Visage; Olivier Gournay; Najah Benguirat; Sofiane Hamidi; Laeticia Chaussumier; Nathalie Mougenot; James A Flanders; Richard Isnard; Jean-Baptiste Michel; Stéphane Hatem; Didier Letourneur; Françoise Norol
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.845

5.  Imaging challenges in biomaterials and tissue engineering.

Authors:  Alyssa A Appel; Mark A Anastasio; Jeffery C Larson; Eric M Brey
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 12.479

Review 6.  Imaging Biomaterial-Tissue Interactions.

Authors:  Yu Shrike Zhang; Junjie Yao
Journal:  Trends Biotechnol       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 19.536

7.  Engineering cancer microenvironments for in vitro 3-D tumor models.

Authors:  Waseem Asghar; Rami El Assal; Hadi Shafiee; Sharon Pitteri; Ramasamy Paulmurugan; Utkan Demirci
Journal:  Mater Today (Kidlington)       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 31.041

Review 8.  Application of medical imaging methods and artificial intelligence in tissue engineering and organ-on-a-chip.

Authors:  Wanying Gao; Chunyan Wang; Qiwei Li; Xijing Zhang; Jianmin Yuan; Dianfu Li; Yu Sun; Zaozao Chen; Zhongze Gu
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-09-12

9.  Characterization of time-course morphological features for efficient prediction of osteogenic potential in human mesenchymal stem cells.

Authors:  Fumiko Matsuoka; Ichiro Takeuchi; Hideki Agata; Hideaki Kagami; Hirofumi Shiono; Yasujiro Kiyota; Hiroyuki Honda; Ryuji Kato
Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 4.530

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.