Saad B Qasim1, Shariq Najeeb2, Robin M Delaine-Smith3, Andrew Rawlinson4, Ihtesham Ur Rehman5. 1. Materials Science and Engineering Department, Kroto Research Institute, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S3 7HQ, United Kingdom. 2. School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2SZ, United Kingdom. 3. Institute of Bioengineering, School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road E1 4NS, London, United Kingdom. 4. Academic Unit of Restorative Dentistry, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2SZ, United Kingdom. 5. Materials Science and Engineering Department, Kroto Research Institute, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S3 7HQ, United Kingdom. Electronic address: i.u.rehman@sheffield.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The regeneration of periodontal tissues lost as a consequence of destructive periodontal disease remains a challenge for clinicians. Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) has emerged as the most widely practiced regenerative procedure. Aim of this study was to electrospin chitosan (CH) membranes with a low or high degree of fiber orientation and examines their suitability for use as a surface layer in GTR membranes, which can ease integration with the periodontal tissue by controlling the direction of cell growth. METHODS: A solution of CH-doped with polyethylene oxide (PEO) (ratio 95:5) was prepared for electrospinning. Characterization was performed for biophysiochemical and mechanical properties by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, swelling ratio, tensile testing and monitoring degradation using pH analysis, weight profile, ultraviolet-visible (UV-vis) spectroscopy and FTIR analysis. Obtained fibers were also assessed for viability and matrix deposition using human osteosarcoma (MG63) and human embryonic stem cell-derived mesenchymal progenitor (hES-MP) cells. RESULTS: Random and aligned CH fibers were obtained. FTIR analysis showed neat CH spectral profile before and after electrospinning. Electropsun mats were conducive to cellular attachment and viability increased with time. The fibers supported matrix deposition by hES-MPs. Histological sections showed cellular infiltration as well. SIGNIFICANCE: The surface layer would act as seal to prevent junctional epithelium from falling into the defect site and hence maintain space for bone regeneration.
OBJECTIVE: The regeneration of periodontal tissues lost as a consequence of destructive periodontal disease remains a challenge for clinicians. Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) has emerged as the most widely practiced regenerative procedure. Aim of this study was to electrospin chitosan (CH) membranes with a low or high degree of fiber orientation and examines their suitability for use as a surface layer in GTR membranes, which can ease integration with the periodontal tissue by controlling the direction of cell growth. METHODS: A solution of CH-doped with polyethylene oxide (PEO) (ratio 95:5) was prepared for electrospinning. Characterization was performed for biophysiochemical and mechanical properties by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, swelling ratio, tensile testing and monitoring degradation using pH analysis, weight profile, ultraviolet-visible (UV-vis) spectroscopy and FTIR analysis. Obtained fibers were also assessed for viability and matrix deposition using humanosteosarcoma (MG63) and human embryonic stem cell-derived mesenchymal progenitor (hES-MP) cells. RESULTS: Random and aligned CH fibers were obtained. FTIR analysis showed neat CH spectral profile before and after electrospinning. Electropsun mats were conducive to cellular attachment and viability increased with time. The fibers supported matrix deposition by hES-MPs. Histological sections showed cellular infiltration as well. SIGNIFICANCE: The surface layer would act as seal to prevent junctional epithelium from falling into the defect site and hence maintain space for bone regeneration.
Authors: Kirsten N Cicotte; Jamie A Reed; Phuong Anh H Nguyen; Jacqueline A De Lora; Elizabeth L Hedberg-Dirk; Heather E Canavan Journal: Biointerphases Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 2.456
Authors: Ehab Akram Tamimi; Diana Catalina Ardila; Burt D Ensley; Robert S Kellar; Jonathan Vande Geest Journal: J Biomech Eng Date: 2019-02-19 Impact factor: 2.097
Authors: L Parisi; C Galli; A Bianchera; P Lagonegro; L Elviri; A Smerieri; S Lumetti; E Manfredi; R Bettini; G M Macaluso Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Saad B Qasim; Muhammad S Zafar; Shariq Najeeb; Zohaib Khurshid; Altaf H Shah; Shehriar Husain; Ihtesham Ur Rehman Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 5.923