| Literature DB >> 21619638 |
Aldo Leal-Egaña1, Ulf-Dietrich Braumann, Aránzazu Díaz-Cuenca, Marcin Nowicki, Augustinus Bader.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Analyses of the pore size distribution in 3D matrices such as the cell-hydrogel interface are very useful when studying changes and modifications produced as a result of cellular growth and proliferation within the matrix, as pore size distribution plays an important role in the signaling and microenvironment stimuli imparted to the cells. However, the majority of the methods for the assessment of the porosity in biomaterials are not suitable to give quantitative information about the textural properties of these nano-interfaces.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21619638 PMCID: PMC3126761 DOI: 10.1186/1477-3155-9-24
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Figure 1Illustration of the method to determine pore size distribution developed in this work. Image A depicts a hydrogel as it is typically observed using transmission electron microscopy. Image B shows the results of the image segmentation after binarization. Image C shows the result of a Euclidean distance transformation. Image D gives an overlay of the pore region image skeleton (red lines) with the original image. Image skeletons are one-pixel wide center axes. They are defined via the set of inner pore pixels. The set is defined via local distance maxima with respect to alginate segments. Scale bar corresponds to 250 nm.
Figure 2N.
Comparison of values of relative pore radius (rpr) determined by N2 adsorption-desorption and image analyses in cell-free microcapsules made of 0.8% and 1.4% w/v alginate
| Range rpr (nm) | 0.8% w/v Alginate | 1.4% w/v Alginate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 48.9 ± 1.3 | 49.4 ± 2.3 | 59.8 ± 1.5 | 62.8 ± 1.8 | |
| 15.4 ± 1.1 | 16.7 ± 2.3 | 16.1 ± 1.2 | 19.9 ± 1.1 | |
| 13.3 ± 1.0 | 11.1 ± 2.2 | 8.9 ± 1.0 | 9.4 ± 1.6 | |
| 11.3 ± 0.8 | 9.3 ± 1.9 | 8.8 ± 0.7 | 4.7 ± 0.4 | |
| 9.0 ± 0.5 | 11.0 ± 0.7 | 5.3 ± 0.5 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | |
| 2.2 ± 0.3 | 3.0 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | |
Comparison of values of fibril-like radii (flr) determined by image analyses in alginate microcapsules made of 0.8% and 1.4% w/v alginate
| Range (nm) | 0.8% w/v Alginate(%) | 1.4% w/v Alginate(%) |
|---|---|---|
| 48.7 ± 2.8 | 30.3 ± 2.4 | |
| 48.9 ± 3.2 | 64.0 ± 3.1 | |
| 2.3 ± 0.3 | 5.5 ± 0.5 | |
| 0.1 ± 0.01 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | |
| 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 |
Figure 3Sizes of HepG.
Figure 4Analysis of transmission electron microscopy images of the cell biomaterial interface on microcapsules made of 0.8% (A, B, and C) and 1.4% w/v (D, E and F), at day 0 (A and D), 3 (B and E), and 6 (C and F). Arrows show zones where clear constriction of the alginate interface due to cell proliferation is observed. Scale bar represents 10 nm.