Literature DB >> 27219645

Additive manufactured polymeric 3D scaffolds with tailored surface topography influence mesenchymal stromal cells activity.

Sara C Neves1, Carlos Mota, Alessia Longoni, Cristina C Barrias, Pedro L Granja, Lorenzo Moroni.   

Abstract

Additive manufactured three-dimensional (3D) scaffolds with tailored surface topography constitute a clear advantage in tissue regeneration strategies to steer cell behavior. 3D fibrous scaffolds of poly(ethylene oxide terephthalate)/poly(butylene terephthalate) block copolymer presenting different fiber surface features were successfully fabricated by additive manufacturing combined with wet-spinning, in a single step, without any post-processing. The optimization of the processing parameters, mainly driven by different solvent/non-solvent combinations, led to four distinct scaffold types, with average surface roughness values ranging from 0.071 ± 0.012 μm to 1.950 ± 0.553 μm, average pore sizes in the x- and y-axis between 351.1 ± 33.6 μm and 396.1 ± 32.3 μm, in the z-axis between 36.5 ± 5.3 μm and 70.7 ± 8.8 μm, average fiber diameters between 69.4 ± 6.1 μm and 99.0 ± 9.4 μm, and porosity values ranging from 60.2 ± 0.8% to 71.7 ± 2.6%. Human mesenchymal stromal cells (hMSCs) cultured on these scaffolds adhered, proliferated, and produced endogenous extracellular matrix. The effect of surface roughness and topography on hMSCs differentiation was more evident for cells seeded at lower density, where the percentage of cells in direct contact with the surface was higher compared to more densely seeded scaffolds. Under osteogenic conditions, lower surface roughness values (0.227 ± 0.035 μm) had a synergistic effect on hMSCs behavior, while chondrogenesis was favored on rougher surfaces (1.950 ± 0.553 μm).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27219645     DOI: 10.1088/1758-5090/8/2/025012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biofabrication        ISSN: 1758-5082            Impact factor:   9.954


  6 in total

Review 1.  Why the impact of mechanical stimuli on stem cells remains a challenge.

Authors:  Roman Goetzke; Antonio Sechi; Laura De Laporte; Sabine Neuss; Wolfgang Wagner
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 9.261

2.  Multiscale porosity in mesoporous bioglass 3D-printed scaffolds for bone regeneration.

Authors:  M Natividad Gómez-Cerezo; Juan Peña; Sašo Ivanovski; Daniel Arcos; María Vallet-Regí; Cedryck Vaquette
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 7.328

3.  Additive Manufacturing of Poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate)/poly(ε-caprolactone) Blend Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Dario Puppi; Andrea Morelli; Federica Chiellini
Journal:  Bioengineering (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-24

4.  Biomimetic strategies for fracture repair: Engineering the cell microenvironment for directed tissue formation.

Authors:  Wollis J Vas; Mittal Shah; Rawiya Al Hosni; Helen C Owen; Scott J Roberts
Journal:  J Tissue Eng       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 7.813

Review 5.  Strategies to Improve Nanofibrous Scaffolds for Vascular Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Tianyu Yao; Matthew B Baker; Lorenzo Moroni
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 5.076

6.  Soft substrates direct stem cell differentiation into the chondrogenic lineage without the use of growth factors.

Authors:  Tosca Roncada; Roxane Bonithon; Gordon Blunn; Marta Roldo
Journal:  J Tissue Eng       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 7.940

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.