Polymerized high internal phase emulsions (polyHIPEs) have been utilized in the creation of injectable scaffolds that cure in situ to fill irregular bone defects and potentially improve tissue healing. Previously, thermally initiated scaffolds required hours to cure, which diminished the potential for clinical translation. Here, a double-barrel syringe system for fabricating redox-initiated polyHIPEs with dramatically shortened cure times upon injection was demonstrated with three methacrylated macromers. The polyHIPE cure time, compressive properties, and pore architecture were investigated with respect to redox initiator chemistry and concentration. Increased concentrations of redox initiators reduced cure times from hours to minutes and increased the compressive modulus and strength without compromising the pore architecture. Additionally, storage of the uncured emulsion at reduced temperatures for 6 months was shown to have minimal effects on the resulting graft properties. These studies indicate that the uncured emulsions can be stored in the clinic until they are needed and then rapidly cured after injection to rigid, high-porosity scaffolds. In summary, we have improved upon current methods of generating injectable polyHIPE grafts to meet translational design goals of long storage times and rapid curing (<15 min) without sacrificing porosity or mechanical properties.
Polymerized high internal phase emulsions (polyHIPEs) have been utilized in the creation of injectable scaffolds that cure in situ to fill irregular bone defects and potentially improve tissue healing. Previously, thermally initiated scaffolds required hours to cure, which diminished the potential for clinical translation. Here, a double-barrel syringe system for fabricating redox-initiated polyHIPEs with dramatically shortened cure times upon injection was demonstrated with three methacrylated macromers. The polyHIPE cure time, compressive properties, and pore architecture were investigated with respect to redox initiator chemistry and concentration. Increased concentrations of redox initiators reduced cure times from hours to minutes and increased the compressive modulus and strength without compromising the pore architecture. Additionally, storage of the uncured emulsion at reduced temperatures for 6 months was shown to have minimal effects on the resulting graft properties. These studies indicate that the uncured emulsions can be stored in the clinic until they are needed and then rapidly cured after injection to rigid, high-porosity scaffolds. In summary, we have improved upon current methods of generating injectable polyHIPE grafts to meet translational design goals of long storage times and rapid curing (<15 min) without sacrificing porosity or mechanical properties.
Emerging fields like tissue engineering
are driving the development
of novel materials with specialized properties to serve as temporary
three-dimensional matrices to regenerate complex tissues.[1] Material chemistry and physical architecture
are critical to guiding regeneration. An interconnected porous structure
is needed to encourage cell growth, nutrient and metabolic waste transport,
and neovascularization.[2] Bone and other
structural tissues also require that these porous scaffolds have adequate
mechanical properties to withstand physiological loading until tissue
function is restored.[1,3] Great effort has been spent developing
materials and fabrication strategies to meet these design criteria;
however, matching the constraints of tissue regeneration and sufficient
mechanical properties to restore function remains challenging given
that many of these properties are inversely related to each other.
For example, high porosity enhances mass transport to support cell
viability but typically reduces mechanical properties. Polymerized
high internal phase emulsions (polyHIPEs) constitute a more recent
scaffold fabrication technique that offers unique advantages in meeting
these diverse criteria.[4]PolyHIPEs
have been investigated as tissue-engineered scaffolds
because of their tunable mechanical properties and pore architectures
that are appropriate for tissue regeneration.[4−7] A unique advantage of the polyHIPEs
developed in our lab is their solvent-free fabrication and low cure
temperature that permits their use as an injectable scaffold that
cures to rigid foams in the body. This injectability allows these
scaffolds to match irregular defect geometries and thus eliminate
gaps and micromotion, which could reduce the frequency of graft failure
and revision surgeries.[1,3,7] An
injectable graft that cures in situ would also reduce
the cost and time associated with computer-aided design and fabrication
methods.[8] Finally, the solvent-free fabrication
method permits incorporation of bioactive cues to facilitate cell
differentiation and promote new tissue growth.[2,8]While these scaffolds offer many advantages over alternative bone
grafts, current biodegradable formulations require roughly 2 h to
cure at body temperature.[5,7] Clinicians prefer fast-curing
materials that reduce surgical times, lower the patient’s risk
of infection, and rapidly stabilize defects.[3] Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) bone cement cures in just 15 min
and is the most common injectable system used clinically to stabilize
orthopedic implants. Although PMMA bone cements are fast and direct,
it does not facilitate tissue regeneration because it is highly exothermic,
nondegradable, and nonporous. In contrast, an injectable polyHIPE
that cures within 15 min would be advantageous because it can stabilize
the defect and be loaded with cells prior to injection to provide
a temporary matrix that supports tissue regeneration. In addition
to rapid cure times, off-the-shelf grafts are preferred to allow use
in both emergency and scheduled procedures.[3] Thus, polyHIPE grafts must remain stable in storage for a minimum
of 6 months and then cure rapidly after injection to facilitate clinical
translation.Previous iterations of injectable polyHIPE scaffolds
relied on
thermal initiation, the rate of which increases exponentially with
temperature. A graft that cures in situ is constrained
to a physiological cure temperature of 37 °C, well below the
typical use temperatures of most thermal initiators. In this study,
thermal initiation was replaced with a redox initiator system to decrease
the set time of the HIPEs. Previous redox-cured polyHIPEs displayed
enhanced cure rates but were not designed for biomedical use and often
contained toxic or nondegradable components.[9,10] Here,
a method is described that allows for the fabrication of injectable
polyHIPEs from biodegradable macromers that can be stored for months
at a time and then rapidly cures in situ. This proposed
method involves making two separate but nearly identical HIPEs: the
first with an oxidizing initiator and the second with a reducing agent.
Redox-paired initiators allow for rapid polymerization at low temperatures,
while the use of a double-barrel syringe keeps the components separate
and unpolymerized until the two components are mixed upon injection
via a static mixing head. Via the careful selection of initiator concentrations,
this system has the potential to permit stable storage of the uncured
emulsion and rapid curing after injection into the defect. To this
end, we investigated the effect of redox initiator concentration on
the polyHIPE properties of three materials: ethylene glycol dimethacrylate
(EGDMA), butanediol dimethacrylate (BDMA), and propylene fumaratedimethacrylate (PFDMA). The effects of redox concentration and ratio
on cure time, pore architecture, and compressive modulus and strength
were evaluated in relation to their use in orthopedic applications.
Overall, these studies demonstrate the potential of this new method
of fabricating rapid-curing polyHIPEs with long shelf lives for use
as tissue-engineered bone grafts.
Materials
and Methods
Materials
Polyglycerol polyricinoleate (PGPR 4125)
was donated by Paalsgard. All other chemicals were purchased and used
as received from Sigma-Aldrich unless otherwise noted. Human mesenchymal
stem cells (hMSCs) were provided by the Texas A&M Health Science
Center College of Medicine Institute for Regenerative Medicine at
Scott & White.
PFDMA Synthesis
PFDMA was synthesized
in a two-step
process adapted from ref (11). First, propylene oxide was added dropwise to a solution
of fumaric acid and pyridine in 2-butanone (2.3:1.0:0.033 molar ratio)
and refluxed at 75 °C for 18 h. Residual propylene oxide and
2-butatone were removed by distillation, and the product was redissolved
in dichloromethane. Residual acidic byproducts and water were removed
with washing, and the product was dried under vacuum to yield the
diester bis(1,2-hydroxypropyl) fumarate product. The diester was then
end-capped with methacrylate groups using methacryloyl chloride in
the presence of triethylamine. The diester:methacryloyl chloride:triethylamine
molar ratio was 1:2.1:2.1. Hydroquinone was added to the diester to
inhibit cross-linking during synthesis at a molar ratio of 0.008:1.
The reaction mixture was kept below −10 °C to reduce undesirable
side reactions and stirred vigorously under a nitrogen blanket. The
macromer was neutralized overnight with 2 M potassium carbonate. Residual
triethylamine and methacrylic acid were removed with an aluminum oxide
column (7:1 Al2O3:TEA). The integration ratio
of methacrylate protons to fumarate protons in the 1H nuclear
magnetic resonance spectra was used to confirm >90% functionalization
for all macromers prior to polyHIPE fabrication: 1H NMR
(300 MHz, CdCl3) δ 1.33 (dd, 3H, CH3), 1.92 (s, 3H,
CH3), 4.20 (m, 2H, −CH2−), 5.30 (m, 1H, −CH−),
5.58 (s, 1H, −C=CH2), 6.10 (s, 1H, −C=CH2),
6.84 (m, 2H, −CH=CH−).
Removal of Inhibitors by
EGDMA and BDMA
EGDMA and BDMA,
purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, were purified to remove inhibitors prior
to use. The macromers were filtered through an aluminum oxide column
to remove monomethyl ether hydroquinone. The purified products were
stored at 4 °C under a nitrogen blanket until they were used
for HIPE fabrication.
PolyHIPE Fabrication
HIPEs were
fabricated using a
model DAC 150 FVZ-K FlackTek Speedmixer according to a protocol adapted
from ref (5). Briefly,
the macromer was mixed with 10 wt % PGPR 4125 and a varied amount
of benzoyl peroxide (0.5–5.0 wt %) prior to emulsification.
A second mixture consisting of macromer, 10 wt % PGPR, and a varied
amount of trimethylaniline (TMA, 0.5–5.0 wt %) was also combined
prior to emulsification. Once both had been thoroughly mixed, an aqueous
solution of calcium chloride (1 wt %) was then added to the organic
phases [75% (v)] in three additions and mixed at 500 rpm for 2.5 min
each. HIPEs were placed in a double-barrel syringe and the two components
mixed upon injection using a static mixing head (1:1 ratio, 5 mL syringe
with a 3 cm straight mixer, Sulzer Mixpac K-System). HIPEs were then
placed in a 37 °C bath to initiate polymerization (Figure 1). PolyHIPE porosity is dictated by the initial
aqueous volume fraction of the HIPE because of minimal shrinkage during
curing. For this study, the volume fraction and corollary porosity
were maintained at ∼75%.
Figure 1
Schematic of the double-barrel syringe
system.
Schematic of the double-barrel syringe
system.
Rheological Analysis
The polyHIPE cure time was characterized
using an Anton Paar MCR 301 rheometer based on a process adapted from
ref (12). HIPEs were
injected through a mixing head to facilitate redox initiation directly
onto the 37 °C plate. Storage and loss moduli were measured every
15 s using a parallel-plate configuration with a 1 mm gap and 0.5%
strain. The work time is presented as the onset of increasing storage
modulus, and the set time is presented as the tan δ minimum,
which corresponds to storage modulus yielding.
Scanning Electron Microscopy
PolyHIPEs were dried in vacuo for 24 h to remove
water prior to characterization
of the pore architecture. The average pore and interconnect size of
each composition were determined using scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) (JEOL 6500). Circular specimens from three separate polyHIPE
specimens were sectioned into quarters and fractured at the center.
Each specimen was coated with gold and imaged in a rastor pattern
yielding five images. Pore size measurements were completed on the
first 10 pores that crossed the median of each 500× magnification
micrograph. Average pore sizes for each polyHIPE composition are reported
(n = 450). A statistical correction was calculated
to account for the random fracture plane through spherical voids and
pores, 2/√3.[13] Average diameter
values were multiplied by this correction factor, resulting in a more
accurate description of the pore diameter.
Mechanical Testing
PolyHIPE compressive properties
were measured using an Instron 3300 instrument equipped with a 1000
N load cell. ASTM D1621-04a was utilized to determine the compressive
modulus and strength of the polyHIPEs.[14] Each polyHIPE specimen was sectioned into three disks (15 mm diameter,
5 mm thickness) using an Isomet saw and compressed at a strain rate
of 50 μm/s. The compressive modulus was calculated from the
slope of the linear region after correcting for zero strain, and the
compressive strength was identified as the stress at the yield point
or 10% strain, whichever occurred first. Reported moduli and strength
data were averages of nine specimens for each composition tested.
Gel Fraction
The gel fraction was measured gravimetrically
to evaluate the extent of network formation. After being cured for
24 h, polyHIPE samples were sectioned into 15 mm × 1 mm disks.
The mass was recorded for each specimen after vacuum drying for 48
h, incubating in 100× dichloromethane at 20 °C for 48 h,
and vacuum drying again until a constant mass was achieved. The final
weight divided by the initial weight was assessed as the gel fraction.
Long-Term Storage
Uncured PFDMA HIPEs were stored at
4 °C for up to 6 months and sampled each month to determine the
impact of storage on polyHIPE architecture and mechanical properties.
After a sample had been removed, it was thawed for 60 min and then
injected through a syringe and cured for 48 h prior to characterization,
as described above.
In Vitro Cytocompatibility
of Macromers
Investigation of macromer cytocompatibility
was performed initially
prior to seeding cells directly on polyHIPE sections. The in vitro cytocompatibility of BDMA, EGDMA, and PFDMA was
assessed using a modified ISO 10993-5 extraction dilution test. All
macromers were further purified by being washed in deionized water
at a volume ratio of 1:100 and incubated under vacuum for 24 h prior
to the experiment. Bone marrow-derived hMSCs were obtained as passage
1 in a cryovial from the Center for the Preparation and Distribution
of Adult Stem Cells. Cells were cultured in growth medium containing
16.5% fetal bovine serum (Atlanta Biologicals), 1% l-glutamine
(Life Technologies), and Minimum Essential Medium α (MEM α,
Life Technologies) to 80% confluency and utilized at passages 5 and
6. Cells were trypsinized with 0.25% Trypsin-EDTA (Life Technologies),
seeded at a density of 40000 cells/cm2 in a 96-well plate,
and allowed to adhere for 24 h. The following day, 100 μL of
each macromer was incubated in 300 μL of growth medium supplemented
with 1 vol % penicillin/streptomycin (Life Technologies) in a 48-well
plate to mimic the ratio of organic to aqueous phase in the HIPE.
After incubation for 10 min at 37 °C in 5% CO2, the
supernatant above the macromers was aspirated and diluted to 10×
and 100× solutions. This time frame was selected on the basis
of the cure rates determined previously for these macromers that approximate
the maximal extraction of the unreacted macromer prior to cure. Extracted
and diluted media (1×, 10×, and 100×) were then added
to cells and the cells cultured for an additional 24 h. Viability
was assessed utilizing the Live/Dead assay kit (Molecular Probes).
Analysis was completed using a plate reader (Tecan Infinite M200Pro)
with excitation and emission wavelengths of 485 and 528 nm for calcein-AM
and 528 and 620 nm for ethidium homodimer-1, respectively. Viability
was normalized to cells on tissue culture polystyrene.
In
Vitro Cytocompatibility of Redox PolyHIPEs
The viability
of hMSCs directly seeded on cured polyHIPEs was assessed
to illustrate the cytocompatibility of quick-curing redox foams. PolyHIPEs
were fabricated as stated above and sectioned into 500 μm thick
wafers using an Isomet saw. Specimens were sterilized for 3 h in 70%
ethanol, subjected to a wetting ladder, washed four times with PBS,
and incubated overnight in MEM α supplemented with 40% (v/v)
FBS at 5% CO2 and 37 °C. Cells were seeded at densities
of 25000 cells/cm2 (EGDMA and BDMA) and 100000 cells/cm2 (PFDMA) in growth medium supplemented with 1 vol % penicillin/streptomycin
and cultured for 3 and 24 h. Viability was assessed using the Live/Dead
assay kit. Rastor imaging (five images per specimen) was conducted
on four specimens (n = 20) utilizing a fluorescent
microscope (Nikon Eclipse TE2000-S), and cells were manually counted
to quantify viability.
Statistical Analysis
The data are
displayed as means
± the standard deviation for each composition. A Student’s t test was performed to determine any statistically significant
differences between compositions. All tests were conducted a 95% confidence
interval (P < 0.05).
Results and Discussion
Effect
of Redox Initiator Concentration on Work and Set Time
Prior
to curing, all HIPEs flowed like viscous fluids but were
rheologically similar to gels (G′ > G″), which is expected for HIPEs.[12,15] Their moduli remained relatively constant before curing began, indicating
that the emulsions were stable without significant phase separation.[12] Work time is defined by ISO1997 as the “period
of time, measured from the start of mixing, during which it is possible
to manipulate a dental material without an adverse effect on its properties”,
and set time is accepted as the point at which a polymer network is
formed.[12] Previously, we reported a cure
time for PFDMA of approximately 2 h (5 wt % BPO),[5] whereas both EGDMA and BDMA require >10 h to set with
thermal
initiation alone. Utilization of the reducing agent TMA in combination
with BPO dramatically reduced work and set times for all materials
from hours to minutes. This corresponded to a 1 order of magnitude
increase in rate over that for thermal initiation alone.[5] Increasing the total redox initiator concentration
from 0.5 to 5 wt % also decreased both work and set times for all
materials (Figure 2). For EGDMA, redox initiation
with a concentration of 0.5 wt % decreased the work time to 3.5 min
and the set time to 5 min. Increasing the initiator concentration
to 1 wt % further decreased the work time to 30 s and the set time
to 1 min. BDMA displayed slower set and work times than EGDMA under
the same conditions. At 0.5 wt %, BDMA’s work time and set
time were 5 and 7.5 min, respectively, with further decreases to 1
and 2 min, respectively, at 1.0 wt %. PFDMA had work and set times
similar to those of BDMA with (6 and 7 min for 0.1 wt % and 1 and
1.3 min for 1 wt %, respectively). All of the 5 wt % compositions
cured before measurements could be taken with the rheometer (<30
s).
Figure 2
Storage and loss moduli during polymerization of EGDMA (A), BDMA
(C), and PFDMA (E) polyHIPE and work and set times for EGDMA (B),
BDMA (D), and PFDMA (F) polyHIPEs at 37 °C with a 1.0:1.0 TMA:BPO
ratio.
Storage and loss moduli during polymerization of EGDMA (A), BDMA
(C), and PFDMA (E) polyHIPE and work and set times for EGDMA (B),
BDMA (D), and PFDMA (F) polyHIPEs at 37 °C with a 1.0:1.0 TMA:BPO
ratio.PMMA bone cement is one of the
most prevalent injectable biomaterials
in orthopedic applications because it undergoes a transition from
a low-viscosity liquid to a rigid solid within 15 min.[16−19] The PMMA physical transition allows surgeons to work with either
a liquid or puddy to best suite their procedure and is a contributing
factor in PMMA’s widespread use.[18] The findings from this study demonstrate the utility of the redox
system for increasing the cure rate of the polyHIPEs to ranges comparable
to those of PMMA bone cements. We also demonstrated that the cure
rate can be further modulated from <30 s to 10 min by changing
the redox initiator concentration. In contrast to PMMA, which is nonporous,
nonbiodegradable, and highly exothermic with peak temperatures reaching
110 °C,[20] these polyHIPEs cure to
porous and degradable materials with a maximal exotherm of only 42
°C. This low exotherm would be critical if the scaffolds were
to be used synergistically with stem cells or growth factors. It should
be noted that in vivo polymerization may occur more
rapidly if the mixing head temperature is elevated to 37 °C,
causing the HIPE to warm quicker than tested. This effect is expected
to be minimal given that the HIPE passes through the mixing head for
<1 s. If differences were found and needed to be adjusted, this
work demonstrates that set time can be increased by decreasing the
total amount of initiator or decreasing the reducing initiator concentration.
Effect of Redox Initiator Concentration on Network Formation
Additional rheological and gel fraction data were analyzed to investigate
the impact of redox initiation concentration on network formation
in candidate polyHIPEs. In each material, an induction period was
evident prior to an increase in modulus that was dependent on macromer
chemistry (EGDMA < BDMA < PFDMA) that was primarily responsible
for the difference in cure times (Figure 2).
It was hypothesized that reduced radical diffusion and steric hindrances
associated with an increased macromer molecular weight resulted in
longer induction periods, especially at the low-initiator concentration
compositions.[21] PFDMA, BDMA, and EGDMA
have molecular masses of ∼362, 226, and 198 g/mol, respectively.
HIPE viscosity trended with macromer molecular weight, with the value
of PFDMA almost 30 times greater than that of EGDMA. The increased
viscosity likely inhibited initiator diffusion and reaction in the
PFDMA HIPEs as compared to those in the EGDMA HIPEs.[21,22] As the initiator concentration was increased from 0.5 to 1.0 wt
%, this induction period decreased and the slopes of the moduli increased,
suggesting an increased polymerization rate.[23] This was attributed to an increased number of initiation sites leading
to more chains growing simultaneously and causing chain molecular
weight to increase more rapidly.P < 0.001 compared
to EGDMA 1.0 and 5.0 wt % pore sizes.P < 0.05 compared
to BDMA 0.5 and 1.0 wt % pore sizes.P < 0.01 compared
to PFDMA 1.0 and 5.0 wt % pore sizes.P < 0.01 compared
to 0.5:1.0 and 5.0:1.0 TMA:BPO pore sizes.The gel fraction (Table 1)
was utilized
to compare the extent of network formation in polyHIPEs after they
had been cured for 24 h and ranged from 78 to 92% for all compositions
(Table 1). As expected, an increasing initiator
concentration correlated with an increased gel fraction. The PFDMA
gel fraction increased the most from 78 to 86%. The BDMA gel fraction
also increased significantly with higher initiator concentrations
(from 86 to 92%), whereas the EGDMA gel fractions increased only from
86 to 89%. Both EGDMA and BDMA had gel fractions significantly higher
than those of the corresponding PFDMApolyHIPEs, likely because to
steric hindrance and a reduced rate of radical diffusion associated
with its higher molecular weight. Additionally, highly cross-linked
microgels could form and begin to sterically hinder further cross-linking,
increasing the number of network defects and free ends.[21] It should be noted that PGPR was not removed
from the specimens prior to DCM incubation and should account for
approximately 9% of specimen mass. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
of the extract solutions showed the presence of PGPR, but the concentration
was not quantified (data not shown). Assuming all of the PGPR was
removed with the DCM, gel fractions were actually between 94 and 100%.
Overall, these polyHIPEs showed excellent network formation that was
further enhanced at higher initiator concentrations.
Table 1
Effects of Macromer
and Initiator
Chemistry on Average Gel Fractions, Pore Diameters, and Interconnect
Diameters of Various PolyHIPE Formulations
material
redox initiator (wt %)
gel
fraction
(%)
pore diameter
(μm)
interconnect
diameter (μm)
EGDMA
0.5
86.1 ± 2.8
27 ± 12a
3 ± 2
1.0
89.1 ± 0.5
20 ± 10
3 ± 1
5.0
89.0 ± 1.0
19 ± 12
3 ± 1
BDMA
0.5
85.8 ± 0.4
14 ± 6
3 ± 1
1.0
89.3 ± 0.4
14 ± 6
3 ± 1
5.0
92.1 ± 0.3
13 ± 7b
2 ± 1
PFDMA
0.5
77.9 ± 1.7
5 ± 3c
1 ± 1
1.0
81.0 ± 0.8
6 ± 3
1 ± 1
5.0
85.6 ± 0.8
6 ± 3
1 ± 1
P < 0.001 compared
to EGDMA 1.0 and 5.0 wt % pore sizes.
P < 0.05 compared
to BDMA 0.5 and 1.0 wt % pore sizes.
P < 0.01 compared
to PFDMA 1.0 and 5.0 wt % pore sizes.
P < 0.01 compared
to 0.5:1.0 and 5.0:1.0 TMA:BPO pore sizes.
Effect of Redox
Initiator Concentration and Storage on Pore
Architecture
The impact of the rapid, redox-initiated cure
on polyHIPE microarchitecture was examined to ensure retention of
desirable pore size and interconnection. EGDMApolyHIPEs possessed
the largest pore diameters, almost double the size of BDMA pores and
quadruple the size of PFDMA pores at each initiator concentration.
Traditionally, pore size has been used as a marker of emulsion stability,
with a smaller pore size indicating enhanced stability and reduced
droplet coalescence prior to the gel point.[24,25] In this study, an increasing pore size correlated with a decreasing
HIPE viscosity: PFDMA (11.0 Pa s), BDMA (0.464 Pa s), and EGDMA (0.343
Pa s). This was consistent with the previous literature reports of
increased emulsion viscosity impeding droplet coalescence and resulting
in smaller pores.[9] Despite differences
between materials, scanning electron micrographs revealed that the
average pore and interconnect diameter were not affected by the redox
initiator concentration for most materials (Figure 3 and Table 1). The 0.5% EGDMA was the
exception with an average pore size of 26 μm, significantly
larger than that of the 1.0 and 5.0% polyHIPEs (20 μm) and indicative
that some amount of coalescence occurred prior to the gel point. The
rapid cure of both the 1.0 and 5.0 wt % EGDMApolyHIPEs reduced droplet
coalescence, and thus, no change in pore size was observed.
Figure 3
Representative
SEMs illustrating the effect of initiator concentration
on the pore architecture of EGDMA (A–C), BDMA (D–F),
and PFDMA (G–I) polyHIPEs.
Representative
SEMs illustrating the effect of initiator concentration
on the pore architecture of EGDMA (A–C), BDMA (D–F),
and PFDMA (G–I) polyHIPEs.Representative SEMs of PFDMApolyHIPEs after the storage of unpolymerized
HIPEs at 4 °C for up to 6 months.Although there are no clear targets for ideal pore diameters
to
regenerate tissues, these pore sizes are relatively small compared
to the general goal of >100 μm; however, recent studies indicate
that <40 μm pores improve regeneration.[26,27] We have previously demonstrated that the emulsion composition and
processing can be modified to increase or decrease the pore diameter.
Future studies to increase the pore size of these grafts will utilize
established techniques of decreasing surfactant concentration and
incorporating additives such as poly(ethylene glycol).[5,7,25,28] BDMA and EGDMApolyHIPEs possessed pore diameters of up to 60 μm
when the polyHIPEs were cured via thermal initiation (data not shown).
We hypothesized that the use of the static mixing head in this study
decreased the pore size by imparting extra shear forces on the emulsion
and further breaking droplets down to smaller diameters. Therefore,
the use of a large diameter mixing head should minimize the impact
on pore diameter for all materials and compositions tested.A crucial element of the double-barrel system is that the two HIPEs
can be stored separately until they are needed, and the shelf life
can be further extended by storage at reduced temperatures. PFDMA
HIPEs were stored at 4 °C with samples removed and cured to examine
any effect of storage on pore size, indicating droplet coalescence
or phase separation over time. No significant change in pore architecture
was observed over a period of 6 months (Figure 4). This same technique could be used with any emulsion but is especially
useful for these solvent-free polyHIPEs that could encapsulate live
cells or other biological therapeutics that could then be cryogenically
stored without losing efficacy. Also, this method could facilitate
scale-up with a central facility making the emulsion-filled syringes
and transported to facilities where needed.
Figure 4
Representative SEMs of PFDMA polyHIPEs after the storage of unpolymerized
HIPEs at 4 °C for up to 6 months.
Effect of initiator concentration
on compressive modulus (A) and
strength (B) for each material. One composition had large regions
of uncured material and was not tested, denoted with an X.
Effect of Redox Initiator Concentration on
Compressive Properties
The compressive modulus and strength
are clinically important for
bone grafts in stabilizing defects. An increased defect stability
would reduce the necessity for immobilization and allow for earlier
loading, which has established benefits in stimulating bone regeneration.[29] Although the polyHIPEs set within several minutes,
specimens were sectioned after a 24 h cure for further characterization.
The compressive modulus and strength increased as the redox initiator
concentration increased for all materials tested (Figure 5). BDMA was significantly stiffer and stronger than
both EGDMA and PFDMA at each concentration tested. These differences
in strength were more pronounced than those of the modulus, with even
the weakest BDMA (0.5 wt % initiator) having a yield strength higher
than those of all but the strongest EGDMA and PFDMApolyHIPEs (5.0
wt % initiator). The 0.5 wt % PFDMA samples were not tested in compression
because they possessed large regions of uncured HIPE (reflected in
their lower gel fraction). We hypothesize that the high viscosity
of PFDMA decreased the mixing efficiency of the two HIPEs and limited
radical diffusion resulting in regions of uncured HIPEs. This was
not observed in the 1.0 or 5.0% PFDMA HIPEs because of the higher
concentration of the initiator that limited the role of radical diffusion
throughout the material. A longer static mixing head may eliminate
the uncured regions in the 0.5% redox PFDMA. Representative loading
curves are presented in Figure 6. EGDMApolyHIPEs
were brittle and reduced to a compacted powder after compressive testing,
whereas both BDMA and PFDMA retained their dimensions. The toughness
for all materials appeared to increase at higher initiator concentrations,
with 5 wt % redox BDMA and PFDMA specimens showing no signs of brittle
fracture.
Figure 5
Effect of initiator concentration
on compressive modulus (A) and
strength (B) for each material. One composition had large regions
of uncured material and was not tested, denoted with an X.
Figure 6
Representative compressive loading curves for each material and
initiator concentration.
Representative compressive loading curves for each material and
initiator concentration.These porous materials approach the compressive properties
of cancellous
bone when matched by density, indicating the potential to mechanically
stabilize the defect and elicit the appropriate mechanical cues to
regenerate bone.[2,30,31] Furthermore, some studies have shown that the mechanical properties
required to trigger bone formation may be much lower than those of
fully matured bone tissue.[17] In addition,
the redox initiator system in these studies resulted in a rapid maturation
of mechanical properties compared to that of thermal initiation alone.
Previously, the compressive modulus and strength of PFDMApolyHIPEs
thermally cured with 5 wt % BPO increased over a 2 week incubation
at 37 °C (Figure 7). In that time, the
modulus increased from 8.5 to 43 MPa and the strength from 0.4 to
3 MPa. In contrast, the 5 wt % redox PFDMApolyHIPEs achieved similar
properties within 24 h of incubation and remained constant for the
2 weeks tested. As such, the redox system could potentially be used
as an immediate fixation device and/or allow patients to begin loading
the injury site more quickly, which can improve patient outcomes.[29]
Figure 7
Effect of incubation for 1 and 14 days at 37 °C on
PFDMA polyHIPE
compressive (A) modulus and (B) strength.
Effect of incubation for 1 and 14 days at 37 °C on
PFDMA polyHIPE
compressive (A) modulus and (B) strength.
Effect of the TMA:BPO Ratio on PolyHIPE Properties
The ratio
of reductant to oxidant was also investigated to decouple
the effects of rapid curing rates from increased initiator concentration.
As expected, increasing the relative amount of TMA to BPO resulted
in decreased work and set times, from 90 to 30 s and from 2.5 to 1
min, respectively (Figure 8A). It should be
noted that the 5.0 wt % TMA/1.0 wt % BPO HIPE set before testing could
begin (<20 s). We hypothesize that increasing the relative amount
of TMA increases its availability to react with BPO, resulting in
faster radical production and initiation. Other researchers have shown
similar results with BPO/TMA systems and identified the formation
of the BPO–TMA complex as the rate-limiting step in radical
production.[32,33] As such, the faster initiation
would allow the HIPEs to form a network more quickly and increase
the cure rate. The compressive data collected after 24 h indicated
that the redox initiator ratio had little to no effect on the compressive
modulus or strength (Figure 8B,C). There was
also a minimal effect on the pore architecture. The average pore diameter
varied slightly as the relative amount of TMA was increased, but no
clear trend was observed. The 1.0:1.0 ratio had the largest average
pore diameter (20 μm), with 0.5 and 5.0:1.0 ratios yielding
slightly smaller values of 19 and 17 μm, respectively. Although
statistically significant, these differences are small, and the overall
pore architecture is similar between the compositions.
Figure 8
Effect of an increasing
TMA:BPO ratio in EGDMA polyHIPEs on (A)
work and set times, (B) the compressive modulus, and (C) the compressive
strength.
Effect of an increasing
TMA:BPO ratio in EGDMApolyHIPEs on (A)
work and set times, (B) the compressive modulus, and (C) the compressive
strength.Overall, these results demonstrate
that the polyHIPE work and set
time can be tuned in a manner independent of other polyHIPE properties
(compressive modulus and strength, pore and interconnect diameter)
with small variations in the reductant:oxidant ratio. For biomedical
devices, especially tissue-engineered grafts, this provides researchers
a route for preserving graft physical properties and cytocompatibility
while optimizing work and set times to meet physician preferences.
In Vitro hMSC Cytocompatbility Assessment
Initial studies of the surfactant PGPR confirmed that there were
no cytotoxic effects (>95% viability) after direct cellular exposure
of the surfactant at concentrations used in these studies. Assessment
of hMSC viability was then performed after exposure to extract medium
from unreacted macromers and direct seeding onto cured polyHIPE grafts.
Given the proposed application as an injectable bone graft, the unreacted
macromer study provides an initial assessment of the effect of a brief
exposure of the macromer to cells prior to cross-linking in
situ. The viability of hMSCs after exposure to PFDMA extract
medium was positive (>80%), whereas the viability decreased significantly
after exposure to EGDMA and BDMA extract media (Figure 9). Tenfold and 100-fold dilution of the extract medium resulted
in a large viability for all macromers. Despite the similar low viability
of unsaturated macromer extracts (<5% viability), Mistry et al.
reported no adverse inflammatory response or necrosis after implantation
of the polymer in a bone defect.[34,35] Next, direct
seeding on the cross-linked polyHIPE grafts was evaluated to determine
the potential of these network structures to support hMSC adhesion
and viability. Cell viability results of all three macromers were
greater than 80% at 24 h, which is generally considered to be cytocompatible
(Figure 10). Future studies will focus on the
PFDMA macromer as being the most promising in terms of cytocompatibility
and will assess the cytocompatibility of degradation products using
a transwell setup and longer time points. Given the similarity of
expected degradation products to previously tested fumarate-based
bone grafts, we do not anticipate any issues with these studies.[34−36]
Figure 9
hMSC
viability after a 24 h incubation with diluted extracts (1×,
10×, and 100×) from 10 min incubations of medium with each
macromer.
Figure 10
hMSC viability after 3 and 24 h directly
seeded on BDMA, EGDMA,
and PFDMA 1% redox polyHIPE sections. (A) Micrographs illustrating
live (green) and dead (red) cells on the respective polyHIPE sections
at 24 h. (B) Viability of cells at each time point (n = 20).
hMSC
viability after a 24 h incubation with diluted extracts (1×,
10×, and 100×) from 10 min incubations of medium with each
macromer.hMSC viability after 3 and 24 h directly
seeded on BDMA, EGDMA,
and PFDMA 1% redox polyHIPE sections. (A) Micrographs illustrating
live (green) and dead (red) cells on the respective polyHIPE sections
at 24 h. (B) Viability of cells at each time point (n = 20).
Conclusions
This
study demonstrates the benefits of redox-initiated polyHIPEs
delivered using double-barrel syringes as tissue-engineered bone grafts.
Redox initiation reduced work and set times from hours to minutes,
matching those of current products like PMMA bone cement. These reduced
cure times were also achieved with lower total initiator concentrations
that may enhance material cytocompatibility. Increasing the redox
initiator concentration increased the compressive modulus and strength
with a minimal impact on the pore architecture. Further modulation
of the reductant:oxidant ratio decoupled the set time from the compressive
modulus and strength, allowing for increased tunability of future
scaffold properties. The use of the double-barrel syringe permitted
the emulsions to be stored for months at reduced temperatures and
then undergo rapid on-demand curing upon injection due to mixing of
the two components. Overall, the methodology developed in these studies
facilitates clinical translation of this technology by providing new
graft materials with improved attributes that maintain similar handling
and deployment of traditional PMMA bone cements.
Authors: Lauran R Madden; Derek J Mortisen; Eric M Sussman; Sarah K Dupras; James A Fugate; Janet L Cuy; Kip D Hauch; Michael A Laflamme; Charles E Murry; Buddy D Ratner Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-08-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jennifer L Robinson; Robert S Moglia; Melissa C Stuebben; Madison A P McEnery; Elizabeth Cosgriff-Hernandez Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Robert S Moglia; Jennifer L Holm; Nicholas A Sears; Caitlin J Wilson; Dawn M Harrison; Elizabeth Cosgriff-Hernandez Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2011-09-08 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Jennifer L Robinson; Madison A P McEnery; Hannah Pearce; Michael E Whitely; Dany J Munoz-Pinto; Mariah S Hahn; Huinan Li; Nicholas A Sears; Elizabeth Cosgriff-Hernandez Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Michael E Whitely; Jennifer L Robinson; Melissa C Stuebben; Hannah A Pearce; Madison A P McEnery; Elizabeth Cosgriff-Hernandez Journal: ACS Biomater Sci Eng Date: 2017-01-23
Authors: Thomas E Paterson; Giulia Gigliobianco; Colin Sherborne; Nicola H Green; James M Dugan; Sheila MacNeil; Gwendolen C Reilly; Frederik Claeyssens Journal: APL Bioeng Date: 2018-04-26
Authors: Hannah A Pearce; Emily Y Jiang; Joseph W R Swain; Adam M Navara; Jason L Guo; Yu Seon Kim; Andrew Woehr; Jeffrey D Hartgerink; Antonios G Mikos Journal: Regen Biomater Date: 2021-12-13
Authors: Dana Jenkins; Karim Salhadar; Grant Ashby; Anita Mishra; Joy Cheshire; Felipe Beltran; Melissa Grunlan; Sébastien Andrieux; Cosima Stubenrauch; Elizabeth Cosgriff-Hernandez Journal: Bioact Mater Date: 2021-11-12
Authors: Jakob Naranda; Maja Sušec; Uroš Maver; Lidija Gradišnik; Mario Gorenjak; Andreja Vukasović; Alan Ivković; Marjan Slak Rupnik; Matjaž Vogrin; Peter Krajnc Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-06-24 Impact factor: 4.379