BACKGROUND: Soft-tissue repair is currently limited by the availability of autologous tissue sources and the absence of an ideal soft-tissue replacement comparable to native adipose tissue. Extracellular matrix-based biomaterials have demonstrated great potential as instructive scaffolds for regenerative medicine, mechanically and biochemically defined by the tissue of origin. As such, the distinctive high lipid content of adipose tissue requires unique processing conditions to generate a biocompatible scaffold for soft-tissue repair. METHODS: Human adipose tissue was decellularized to obtain a matrix devoid of lipids and cells while preserving extracellular matrix architecture and bioactivity. To control degradation and volume persistence, the scaffold was cross-linked using hexamethylene diisocyanate and 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide. In vitro studies with human adipose-derived stem cells were used to assess cell viability and adipogenic differentiation on the biomaterial. In vivo biocompatibility and volume persistence were evaluated by subcutaneous implantation over 12 weeks in a small-animal model. RESULTS: The scaffold provided a biocompatible matrix supporting the growth and differentiation of adipose-derived stem cells in vitro. Cross-linking the matrix increased its resistance to enzymatic degradation. Subcutaneous implantation of the acellular adipose matrix in Sprague-Dawley rats showed minimal inflammatory reaction. Adipose tissue development and vascularization were observed in the implant, with host cells migrating into the matrix indicating the instructive potential of the matrix for guiding tissue remodeling and regeneration. CONCLUSIONS: With its unique biological and mechanical properties, decellularized adipose extracellular matrix is a promising biomaterial scaffold that can potentially be used allogenically for the correction of soft-tissue defects.
BACKGROUND: Soft-tissue repair is currently limited by the availability of autologous tissue sources and the absence of an ideal soft-tissue replacement comparable to native adipose tissue. Extracellular matrix-based biomaterials have demonstrated great potential as instructive scaffolds for regenerative medicine, mechanically and biochemically defined by the tissue of origin. As such, the distinctive high lipid content of adipose tissue requires unique processing conditions to generate a biocompatible scaffold for soft-tissue repair. METHODS:Humanadipose tissue was decellularized to obtain a matrix devoid of lipids and cells while preserving extracellular matrix architecture and bioactivity. To control degradation and volume persistence, the scaffold was cross-linked using hexamethylene diisocyanate and 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide. In vitro studies with humanadipose-derived stem cells were used to assess cell viability and adipogenic differentiation on the biomaterial. In vivo biocompatibility and volume persistence were evaluated by subcutaneous implantation over 12 weeks in a small-animal model. RESULTS: The scaffold provided a biocompatible matrix supporting the growth and differentiation of adipose-derived stem cells in vitro. Cross-linking the matrix increased its resistance to enzymatic degradation. Subcutaneous implantation of the acellular adipose matrix in Sprague-Dawley rats showed minimal inflammatory reaction. Adipose tissue development and vascularization were observed in the implant, with host cells migrating into the matrix indicating the instructive potential of the matrix for guiding tissue remodeling and regeneration. CONCLUSIONS: With its unique biological and mechanical properties, decellularized adipose extracellular matrix is a promising biomaterial scaffold that can potentially be used allogenically for the correction of soft-tissue defects.
Authors: M K Vaicik; M Morse; A Blagajcevic; J Rios; J Larson; F Yang; R N Cohen; G Papavasiliou; E M Brey Journal: J Mater Chem B Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 6.331
Authors: Naghmeh Naderi; Emman J Combellack; Michelle Griffin; Tina Sedaghati; Muhammad Javed; Michael W Findlay; Christopher G Wallace; Afshin Mosahebi; Peter Em Butler; Alexander M Seifalian; Iain S Whitaker Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Elizabeth Brett; Natalie Chung; William Tripp Leavitt; Arash Momeni; Michael T Longaker; Derrick C Wan Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 6.389
Authors: Jessica P Yang; Amy E Anderson; Annemarie McCartney; Xavier Ory; Garret Ma; Elisa Pappalardo; Joel Bader; Jennifer H Elisseeff Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2016-02-21 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Yun Kyung Bae; Gee-Hye Kim; Ji Hye Kwon; Miyeon Kim; Soo Jin Choi; Wonil Oh; Soyoun Um; Hye Jin Jin Journal: Tissue Eng Regen Med Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 4.169
Authors: Matthew T Wolf; Sudipto Ganguly; Tony L Wang; Christopher W Anderson; Kaitlyn Sadtler; Radhika Narain; Christopher Cherry; Alexis J Parrillo; Benjamin V Park; Guannan Wang; Fan Pan; Saraswati Sukumar; Drew M Pardoll; Jennifer H Elisseeff Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Tracy N Clevenger; Cassidy R Hinman; Rebekah K Ashley Rubin; Kate Smither; Daniel J Burke; Craig J Hawker; Darin Messina; Dennis Van Epps; Dennis O Clegg Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Rosalyn D Abbott; Rebecca Y Wang; Michaela R Reagan; Ying Chen; Francis E Borowsky; Adam Zieba; Kacey G Marra; J Peter Rubin; Irene M Ghobrial; David L Kaplan Journal: Adv Healthc Mater Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 9.933