Literature DB >> 26318365

Substrate topography: A valuable in vitro tool, but a clinical red herring for in vivo tenogenesis.

Andrew English1, Ayesha Azeem1, Kyriakos Spanoudes1, Eleanor Jones2, Bhawana Tripathi3, Nandita Basu3, Karrina McNamara4, Syed A M Tofail4, Niall Rooney5, Graham Riley2, Alan O'Riordan6, Graham Cross3, Dietmar Hutmacher7, Manus Biggs8, Abhay Pandit8, Dimitrios I Zeugolis9.   

Abstract

Controlling the cell-substrate interactions at the bio-interface is becoming an inherent element in the design of implantable devices. Modulation of cellular adhesion in vitro, through topographical cues, is a well-documented process that offers control over subsequent cellular functions. However, it is still unclear whether surface topography can be translated into a clinically functional response in vivo at the tissue/device interface. Herein, we demonstrated that anisotropic substrates with a groove depth of ∼317nm and ∼1988nm promoted human tenocyte alignment parallel to the underlying topography in vitro. However, the rigid poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) substrates used in this study upregulated the expression of chondrogenic and osteogenic genes, indicating possible tenocyte trans-differentiation. Of significant importance is that none of the topographies assessed (∼37nm, ∼317nm and ∼1988nm groove depth) induced extracellular matrix orientation parallel to the substrate orientation in a rat patellar tendon model. These data indicate that two-dimensional imprinting technologies are useful tools for in vitro cell phenotype maintenance, rather than for organised neotissue formation in vivo, should multifactorial approaches that consider both surface topography and substrate rigidity be established. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Herein, we ventured to assess the influence of parallel groves, ranging from nano- to micro-level, on tenocytes response in vitro and on host response using a tendon and a subcutaneous model. In vitro analysis indicates that anisotropically ordered micro-scale grooves, as opposed to nano-scale grooves, maintain physiological cell morphology. The rather rigid PLGA substrates appeared to induce trans-differentiation towards chondrogenic and/or steogenic lineage, as evidence by TILDA gene analysis. In vivo data in both tendon and subcutaneous models indicate that none of the substrates induced bidirectional host cell and tissue growth. Collective, these observations indicate that two-dimensional imprinting technologies are useful tools for in vitro cell phenotype maintenance, rather than for directional neotissue formation, should multifactorial approaches that consider both surface topography and substrate rigidity be established.
Copyright © 2015 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lithography; Substrate stiffness; Surface topography; Tendon; Tenocyte morphology; Tenocyte phenotype; Tenocyte trans-differentiation; Tissue regeneration

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26318365     DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.08.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Biomater        ISSN: 1742-7061            Impact factor:   8.947


  16 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical Actuation Systems for the Phenotype Commitment of Stem Cell-Based Tendon and Ligament Tissue Substitutes.

Authors:  Marco Govoni; Claudio Muscari; Joseph Lovecchio; Carlo Guarnieri; Emanuele Giordano
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev Rep       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 5.739

2.  Braided and Stacked Electrospun Nanofibrous Scaffolds for Tendon and Ligament Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Benjamin B Rothrauff; Brian B Lauro; Guang Yang; Richard E Debski; Volker Musahl; Rocky S Tuan
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 3.845

3.  The characterization of decellularized human skeletal muscle as a blueprint for mimetic scaffolds.

Authors:  Klaire Wilson; Abby Terlouw; Kevin Roberts; Jeffrey C Wolchok
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  An experimental toolbox for characterization of mammalian collagen type I in biological specimens.

Authors:  Héctor Capella-Monsonís; João Q Coentro; Valeria Graceffa; Zhuning Wu; Dimitrios I Zeugolis
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 5.  Current hydrogel advances in physicochemical and biological response-driven biomedical application diversity.

Authors:  Huan Cao; Lixia Duan; Yan Zhang; Jun Cao; Kun Zhang
Journal:  Signal Transduct Target Ther       Date:  2021-12-16

6.  Influence of Indium (III) Chloride on Human Dermal Fibroblast Cell Adhesion on Tantalum/Silicon Oxide Nano-Composites.

Authors:  Ali Eskandari; D Moira Glerum; Ting Y Tsui
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.748

7.  Cells Dynamically Adapt to Surface Geometry by Remodeling Their Focal Adhesions and Actin Cytoskeleton.

Authors:  Aysegul Dede Eren; Amy W A Lucassen; Urandelger Tuvshindorj; Roman Truckenmüller; Stefan Giselbrecht; E Deniz Eren; Mehmet Orhan Tas; Phanikrishna Sudarsanam; Jan de Boer
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2022-06-03

8.  Codelivery of Infusion Decellularized Skeletal Muscle with Minced Muscle Autografts Improved Recovery from Volumetric Muscle Loss Injury in a Rat Model.

Authors:  Benjamin Kasukonis; John Kim; Lemuel Brown; Jake Jones; Shahryar Ahmadi; Tyrone Washington; Jeffrey Wolchok
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 3.845

9.  Data on in vitro and in vivo cell orientation on substrates with different topographies.

Authors:  Andrew English; Ayesha Azeem; Kyriakos Spanoudes; Eleanor Jones; Bhawana Tripathi; Nandita Basu; Karrina McNamara; Syed A M Tofail; Niall Rooney; Graham Riley; Alan O'Riordan; Graham Cross; Dietmar Hutmacher; Manus Biggs; Abhay Pandit; Dimitrios I Zeugolis
Journal:  Data Brief       Date:  2015-10-01

10.  Dynamic Mechanical and Nanofibrous Topological Combinatory Cues Designed for Periodontal Ligament Engineering.

Authors:  Joong-Hyun Kim; Min Sil Kang; Mohamed Eltohamy; Tae-Hyun Kim; Hae-Won Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.