Asha Shekaran1, Andres J Garcia. 1. Petit Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The goal of tissue engineering is to restore tissue function using biomimetic scaffolds which direct desired cell fates such as attachment, proliferation and differentiation. Cell behavior in vivo is determined by a complex interaction of cells with extracellular biosignals, many of which exist on a nanoscale. Therefore, recent efforts in tissue engineering biomaterial development have focused on incorporating extracellular matrix- (ECM) derived peptides or proteins into biomaterials in order to mimic natural ECM. Concurrent advances in nanotechnology have also made it possible to manipulate protein and peptide presentation on surfaces on a nanoscale level. SCOPE OF REVIEW: This review discusses protein and peptide nanopatterning techniques and examples of how nanoscale engineering of bioadhesive materials may enhance outcomes for regenerative medicine. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: Synergy between ECM-mimetic tissue engineering and nanotechnology fields can be found in three major strategies: (1) Mimicking nanoscale orientation of ECM peptide domains to maintain native bioactivity, (2) Presenting adhesive peptides at unnaturally high densities, and (3) Engineering multivalent ECM-derived peptide constructs. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: Combining bioadhesion and nanopatterning technologies to allow nanoscale control of adhesive motifs on the cell-material interface may result in exciting advances in tissue engineering. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled Nanotechnologies - Emerging Applications in Biomedicine. 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The goal of tissue engineering is to restore tissue function using biomimetic scaffolds which direct desired cell fates such as attachment, proliferation and differentiation. Cell behavior in vivo is determined by a complex interaction of cells with extracellular biosignals, many of which exist on a nanoscale. Therefore, recent efforts in tissue engineering biomaterial development have focused on incorporating extracellular matrix- (ECM) derived peptides or proteins into biomaterials in order to mimic natural ECM. Concurrent advances in nanotechnology have also made it possible to manipulate protein and peptide presentation on surfaces on a nanoscale level. SCOPE OF REVIEW: This review discusses protein and peptide nanopatterning techniques and examples of how nanoscale engineering of bioadhesive materials may enhance outcomes for regenerative medicine. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: Synergy between ECM-mimetic tissue engineering and nanotechnology fields can be found in three major strategies: (1) Mimicking nanoscale orientation of ECM peptide domains to maintain native bioactivity, (2) Presenting adhesive peptides at unnaturally high densities, and (3) Engineering multivalent ECM-derived peptide constructs. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: Combining bioadhesion and nanopatterning technologies to allow nanoscale control of adhesive motifs on the cell-material interface may result in exciting advances in tissue engineering. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled Nanotechnologies - Emerging Applications in Biomedicine. 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Authors: M Schvartzman; K Nguyen; M Palma; J Abramson; J Sable; J Hone; M P Sheetz; S J Wind Journal: J Vac Sci Technol B Microelectron Nanometer Struct Process Meas Phenom Date: 2009-01-01 Impact factor: 2.427
Authors: Karen L Christman; Vimary Vázquez-Dorbatt; Eric Schopf; Christopher M Kolodziej; Ronald C Li; Rebecca M Broyer; Yong Chen; Heather D Maynard Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2008-12-10 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Shiloh A Hurd; Nadia M Bhatti; Addison M Walker; Ben M Kasukonis; Jeffrey C Wolchok Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Pinar Zorlutuna; Nasim Annabi; Gulden Camci-Unal; Mehdi Nikkhah; Jae Min Cha; Jason W Nichol; Amir Manbachi; Hojae Bae; Shaochen Chen; Ali Khademhosseini Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2012-03-13 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Eun-Cheol Kim; Do Yun Lee; Myung-Hyun Lee; Hong Jae Lee; Kyung-Hee Kim; Richard Leesungbok; Su-Jin Ahn; Su-Jung Park; Joon-Ho Yoon; Yu-Jin Jee; Sang Cheon Lee; Suk Won Lee Journal: Tissue Eng Regen Med Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 4.169
Authors: Laura C Zanetti-Domingues; Marisa L Martin-Fernandez; Sarah R Needham; Daniel J Rolfe; David T Clarke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 3.240