Injectable biomaterials provide the advantage of a minimally invasive application but mostly lack the required structural complexity to regenerate aligned tissues. Here, we report a new class of tissue regenerative materials that can be injected and form an anisotropic matrix with controlled dimensions using rod-shaped, magnetoceptive microgel objects. Microgels are doped with small quantities of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (0.0046 vol %), allowing alignment by external magnetic fields in the millitesla order. The microgels are dispersed in a biocompatible gel precursor and after injection and orientation are fixed inside the matrix hydrogel. Regardless of the low volume concentration of the microgels below 3%, at which the geometrical constrain for orientation is still minimum, the generated macroscopic unidirectional orientation is strongly sensed by the cells resulting in parallel nerve extension. This finding opens a new, minimal invasive route for therapy after spinal cord injury.
Injectable biomaterials provide the advantage of a minimally invasive application but mostly lack the required structural complexity to regenerate aligned tissues. Here, we report a new class of tissue regenerative materials that can be injected and form an anisotropic matrix with controlled dimensions using rod-shaped, magnetoceptive microgel objects. Microgels are doped with small quantities of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (0.0046 vol %), allowing alignment by external magnetic fields in the millitesla order. The microgels are dispersed in a biocompatible gel precursor and after injection and orientation are fixed inside the matrix hydrogel. Regardless of the low volume concentration of the microgels below 3%, at which the geometrical constrain for orientation is still minimum, the generated macroscopic unidirectional orientation is strongly sensed by the cells resulting in parallel nerve extension. This finding opens a new, minimal invasive route for therapy after spinal cord injury.
Entities:
Keywords:
Nerve growth; anisotropy; injectable hydrogel; magnetic alignment; magnetic nanoparticles; microgels; tissue regeneration
In vivo,
cells are surrounded by an extracellular matrix (ECM) that provides
biological, mechanical, and structural support. The ECM functions
as a spatiodynamic bioscaffold, which is created and maintained by
the surrounding cells and in return influences the cellular signaling,
architecture, and functionality.[1] In the
case of irreversible tissue damage, an artificial matrix can be applied
for healing. This matrix needs to address and mimic the conditions
of the respective cell niche(s) in order to induce and support the
regenerative capacity of endogenous surrounding and invading cells,
or cell transplants.[2] Therefore, micron-scale
and modular approaches are developed to fabricate complex functional
biomaterial structures.[3] Moreover, multiple
implantable constructs with aligned channels[4] or fibers[5] have been designed and applied
to provide cell guidance, for example, for the purpose of spinal cord
injury. However, depending on the type of damaged tissue, the severity
of the disorder, and the time after injury, the application of either
a preformed implant or an injectable liquid that forms a matrix in
situ is desired. Injectable matrices are minimally invasive and are
especially suitable to support healing of acute trauma-induced injuries
of sensitive tissues, such as spinal cord,[6] myocardium,[7] and brain,[8] as remaining functional tissue should not be further impaired.[9] The advantage of injectable materials is that
they can adopt any desired shape for the regeneration of various tissues,
including bone,[10] cartilage,[11] and wound healing.[12]As tissues comprise a complex, anisotropic, and hierarchical
structure, regenerative matrices have to provide the correct architecture
to guide cell organization during the healing process.[2b,13] In the case of peripheral and spinal nervous tissue, linear structures
need to be designed. This can be achieved by aligning diamagnetic
ECM–protein hydrogels, such as collagen or fibrin, in high
magnetic fields (>4.5 T).[14] In vivo,
Tranquillo et al. demonstrated more regenerating nerve cells in the
peripheral nervous system when filling the hollow collagen tubes from
Integra Life Sciences with a collagen gel that was aligned in a magnetic
field of 9.4 T.[15] In contrast, most current
injectable materials lack the ability to template complex tissue structures
with directionally organized functions and mechanical properties.
To our knowledge, only a few examples have been proposed for injectable
materials that provide directional control. On the one hand, peptide
hydrogels with monodomain regions of oriented fiber bundles, as introduced
by Zhang et al.,[16] demonstrated aligned
neurite outgrowth of dorsal root ganglions (DRGs) in vitro.[17] On the other hand, composite hydrogels have
been described with polydisperse magnetically aligned chains of spherical
iron oxide particles in Matrigel, supplying structure for orientation
of single fibroblasts and PC12 neuron-like cells, both parallel and
perpendicular to the direction of the particle strings.[18] The alignment of these magnetic particles was
proposed to induce orientation of collagen fibers within a collagen
hydrogel for guiding cells.[19] As concentrations
of magnetic iron oxide particles in the order of 1.5 mM iron decrease
viability of sensitive cells and reduce the ability to form neurites,[20] it is essential to reduce the amount of iron
oxide, incorporated into these regenerative systems.Here, we
demonstrate a new type of anisotropic and injectable hybrid hydrogel,
called an Anisogel. An Anisogel is a biocompatible and soft dual hydrogel
system containing (i) microgels that are monodisperse, magneto-receptive,
rod-shaped, and soft and (ii) a surrounding hydrogel matrix, which
cross-links in situ and fixes the oriented microgels (Figure a). Small amounts of superparamagnetic
iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) are incorporated inside the microgels
to order them unidirectionally in the presence of a low external magnetic
field in the millitesla range. We design microgels with specific dimensions
to induce an ultrahigh magnetic response (UHMR[21]), which allows a significant reduction of SPIONs, circumventing
iron-cytotoxicity. Furthermore, the microgels can be tailored in regard
to their mechano-physical properties by modifying the prepolymer composition.
Following the alignment, the oriented microgels are interlocked within
a cross-linking hydrogel, creating an Anisogel. The soft magneto-responsive
microgels function as nonadherent cell barriers in an even softer
surrounding cell-adhesive fibrin matrix. Thereby, the Anisogel approach
is hierarchically designed bottom-up with building blocks in the nano-
to micro- to macroscale. With this material, we investigate how sensitive
fibroblasts and nerve cells are to structural guidance cues in 3D
and what the minimal amount of required signals is to prompt their
decision to grow in an aligned manner.
Figure 1
Preparation of soft,
anisometric microgels. (a) Our approach of an injectable hybrid hydrogel
(Anisogel), which generates a unidirectional structure in situ by
aligning rod-shaped, magnetoceptive, soft microgels within an even
softer surrounding hydrogel matrix. After injection, the liquid surrounding
hydrogel precursor solution is cross-linked to fix the microgel orientation,
representing barriers, which can linearly direct cell ingrowth. (b)
Soft microgels were prepared by a mold-based soft lithography technique,
involving a repelling PFPE mold, upon which a polymer precursor solution
was cast and captured within the cavities. After UV-curing, microgels
were retrieved by a sticky water-soluble PVP layer. Soft, heterogeneous,
highly water-swollen anisometric microgels were fabricated with various
star-PEG-A concentrations (c) and dimensions (d): top 5 × 5 ×
50 μm3, bottom 1 × 1 × 10 μm3). All scale bars are 50 μm. Green color: fluorescein.
Preparation of soft,
anisometric microgels. (a) Our approach of an injectable hybrid hydrogel
(Anisogel), which generates a unidirectional structure in situ by
aligning rod-shaped, magnetoceptive, soft microgels within an even
softer surrounding hydrogel matrix. After injection, the liquid surrounding
hydrogel precursor solution is cross-linked to fix the microgel orientation,
representing barriers, which can linearly direct cell ingrowth. (b)
Soft microgels were prepared by a mold-based soft lithography technique,
involving a repelling PFPE mold, upon which a polymer precursor solution
was cast and captured within the cavities. After UV-curing, microgels
were retrieved by a sticky water-soluble PVP layer. Soft, heterogeneous,
highly water-swollen anisometric microgels were fabricated with various
star-PEG-A concentrations (c) and dimensions (d): top 5 × 5 ×
50 μm3, bottom 1 × 1 × 10 μm3). All scale bars are 50 μm. Green color: fluorescein.
Fabrication of Anisometric Microgels with
Controlled Mechano-Physical Properties
The rod-shaped microgels
were produced with a mold-based soft lithography approach (Figure b[22]), applying six-armed star-shaped poly(ethylene oxide-stat-propylene oxide) with acrylate end groups (star-PEG-A)
as the reactiveprepolymer. Star-PEG has previously demonstrated to
reduce the formation of fibrous capsules and no inflammatory responses
were detected in vivo.[23] The liquid star-PEG-Aprepolymer was cast into a highly repelling perfluoropolyether (PFPE)
mold[24] in the presence of a photoinitiator
and fluorescein ο-acrylate. UV-curing of the solution-filled
features resulted in fluorescent microgels with precise mold replication
(Supporting Information Figure 1a). The
individual microgel objects were removed from the mold by putting
them in contact with a sticky polyvinylpyrrolidone layer that can
be dissolved in water afterward. Although several techniques have
been developed to fabricate anisometric micron-scale solid particles
over the past decade,[22,25] it is still challenging to produce
anisometric, highly water-swollen, soft microgels. In the case of
water or DMSO as a diluent for the star-PEG-A precursor, evaporation
and an increase in surface tension caused incomplete filling of the
mold cavities (Supporting Information Table 1, Supporting Information Figure 1b). Previously, this problem
has been reduced by decreasing the temperature while molding, forming
soft homogeneous microgels.[26] We opted
to blend the reactivestar-PEG-A with a second nonvolatile, nonreactive
polymer-diluent that was washed out after cross-linking. This enabled
us to generate soft microgels with low polymer contents down to 10
wt/vol % (Figure c),
which provided us an adequate range of polymer densities for in vivo
applications.[27] Typical sizes of the microgel
objects, used in this report, were 50 × 5 × 5 μm3 and 10 × 1 × 1 μm3 (Figure d).Cross-linking of
the star-PEG-A in a polymer blend resulted in reaction-induced phase
decomposition (RIPD, Figure a[28]). Mechanistically, the two
polymers phase separated during cross-linking of the reacting phase
to maintain the minimal Gibb’s free energy (ΔG) according to the Flory–Huggins theory for polymer
blends. This well-known phenomenon enabled us to control the mechano-physical
properties of the microgels and thus the interaction with cells.[2a,29] Three different nonreactive polymers were used in liquid form as
a diluent and resulted in precise molding: linear poly(ethylene glycol)
(PEG-OH) with low MW (0.2 kDa) or six-armed star-shaped poly(ethylene
oxide-stat-propylene oxide) (star-PEG-OH) with higher
MWs (3 and 18 kDa). To facilitate characterization of their structural
and mechanical properties, macroscopic hydrogel disks (12 mm ×
1 mm) were prepared. In all cases, the inert diluent was completely
extracted after curing of the hydrogel by incubation with water (3
times 30 min), indicating fast mass transport of even large molecules,
such as 18 kDa star-PEG-OH (Supporting Information Figure 2). Hydrogels fabricated with water as diluent were
transparent (Figure b), whereas hydrogels made with the polymer blend demonstrated a
completely white appearance before and after extraction, indicating
significant structural heterogeneity (Figure a, Supporting Information Figure 3). As incubation of dried heterogeneous hydrogels in
the inert polymer-diluent did not result in swelling, we confirmed
the incompatibility of the cross-linked network chains with the diluent
after gelation (Supporting Information Figure 4). Visualizing the microscopic cross sections by cryo-electron
micrographs revealed a structure with pores up to the micrometer scale.
The microporosity was reduced at higher star-PEG-A content and increased
when PEG-OH 0.2 kDa was employed (Supporting Information Figure 5). It can be concluded that cross-linking of applied
polymer blends resulted in a double network, whose domains of the
cross-linked star-PEG-A network form a mesoscopic framework with pores
in the microrange, which can facilitate diffusion of nutrients and
cell signaling molecules.[28,36]
Figure 2
Characterization of hydrogels.
(a) Dilution of star-PEG-A (20 wt/vol %) with a nonreactive PEG-based
diluent (here 0.2 kDa PEG-OH) led to a visually white, heterogeneous
hydrogel, consisting of water-filled micron-scale voids and nanoporous
polymer regions, whereas by diluting with water (b) a homogeneous
hydrogel was formed with a transparent appearance and pores in the
nanometer-scale. Elastic modulus (c) and swelling degree (d) of water-diluted
hydrogels in comparison to polymer-diluted hydrogels. (e) FE-SEM analysis
of cryo-cuts of hydrogels showed a difference in the gel morphology,
depending on the type of diluent. The voids of polymer-diluted hydrogels
were also found in fabricated microgels. Data presented as average
±
s.d. and statistical significance performed using two-way ANOVA with
Bonferroni comparison (**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001). Scale
bars in macroscopic hydrogels in (a) and (b) are 2 mm and 5 μm
in FE-SEM images (a,b,e).
Characterization of hydrogels.
(a) Dilution of star-PEG-A (20 wt/vol %) with a nonreactive PEG-based
diluent (here 0.2 kDa PEG-OH) led to a visually white, heterogeneous
hydrogel, consisting of water-filled micron-scale voids and nanoporous
polymer regions, whereas by diluting with water (b) a homogeneous
hydrogel was formed with a transparent appearance and pores in the
nanometer-scale. Elastic modulus (c) and swelling degree (d) of water-diluted
hydrogels in comparison to polymer-diluted hydrogels. (e) FE-SEM analysis
of cryo-cuts of hydrogels showed a difference in the gel morphology,
depending on the type of diluent. The voids of polymer-diluted hydrogels
were also found in fabricated microgels. Data presented as average
±
s.d. and statistical significance performed using two-way ANOVA with
Bonferroni comparison (**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001). Scale
bars in macroscopic hydrogels in (a) and (b) are 2 mm and 5 μm
in FE-SEM images (a,b,e).The heterogeneous hydrogels contained an elastic modulus
in the kPa range and a high degree of swelling in water. The elastic
modulus was lower compared to the water-diluted hydrogels despite
containing the same amount of cross-linked polymer (Figure c). One exception was 30 wt/vol
% star-PEG-A, blended with PEG-OH 0.2 kDa, which had a similar modulus
as the water-diluted variant. When comparing the different blend hydrogels,
we observed that the hydrogels, prepared with low MW PEG-OH, were
significantly stiffer compared to the hydrogels, fabricated with the
higher MW star-PEG-OH. This difference in stiffness was more distinct
for higher star-PEG-A concentrations (20 and 30 wt/vol %), whereas
there was no significant difference in swelling among the inert polymers
at these concentrations (Figure d). For lower star-PEG-A (10 wt/vol %), no significant
differences in stiffness were found between the nonreactive polymer
diluents, but the degree of swelling increased with reduced MW of
the diluent. These findings are in contrast with conventional water-based
hydrogels, for which an increasing elastic modulus is associated with
less water uptake.[30] This may be explained
by differences in the hydrogel structures, as electron micrographs
display two types of morphologies (Figure e, Supporting Information Figures 6 and 7). Dilution of star-PEG-A with both star-PEG-OHs
(3 and 18 kDa) led to a coarser granular structure with smaller globules,
whereas dilution with 0.2 kDa PEG-OH revealed a microscopic interconnected
mesh structure, which was intensified with increasing star-PEG-A content.
The mesh-like structure observed in the case of low MW PEG-OH may
cause the enhanced stiffness’s of the hydrogels, compared to
blending with higher MW star-PEG-OH. The higher degree of swelling
for decreasing MW of the inert polymer in the case of 10 wt/vol %
star-PEG-A may be correlated to the presence of larger macroscopic
pores (Supporting Information Figure 5).
These structural differences might be due to the type of RIPD occurring.
A spinodal decomposition network is known to be more regularly interconnected,
whereas a binodal decomposition network characteristically consists
of associated gel nuclei, giving it a more irregular globular structure.[31] Cryo-electron micrographs of microgels, composed
of 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A and different inert diluents verified that
the microgels contained a similar heterogeneous appearance as the
hydrogel disks, which enables us to control their properties for regenerative
purposes (Figure e, Supporting Information Figure 8).
Alignment of
Microgels by an External Magnetic Field
Alignment of the
microgels was achieved by rendering them magnetic. Anionic-coated
SPIONs (EMG700 by Ferrotec with 45.64% iron oxide in particles, determined
by elemental analysis) were randomly dispersed in the prepolymer solution
before molding and curing. Without an external magnetic field, the
lack of unidirectional spin alignment of the SPIONs impedes a macroscopic
magnetization of the microgels. Within a magnetic field, the magnetization
becomes polarized and long-range dipolar interactions between the
dispersed SPIONs cause a preferred orientation along the easy axis
of the rodlike microgels. This induces microgel alignment parallel
to the magnetic field.[21,32] The incorporation efficiency
and retention of SPIONs were determined by elemental analysis of iron
in macroscopic hydrogel disks after diluent extraction and after incubation
in buffer (phosphate buffered saline (1X PBS)) for 4 weeks at 37 °C.
SPIONs within a 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A hydrogel network, fabricated
by blending PEG-OH 0.2 kDa, were fully retained, despite complete
removal of the PEG-diluent (Figure a, Supporting Information Figure 2). In comparison, hydrogels, prepared with 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A,
diluted with star-PEG-OH, lost more than 20 wt/vol % of the premixed
SPIONs during extraction. This observation suggests that the SPIONs
were better entrapped within the cross-linked hydrogel network when
low MW PEG-OH was applied as nonreactive diluent compared to star-PEG-OH.[28] After extraction, we found that there was no
significant release of SPIONs over a period of 4 weeks, which indicates
a high SPION retention capacity of the heterogeneous hydrogel network
(Figure b). Transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) revealed that homogenization via ultrasonication
yielded well-dispersed SPIONs with only a few aggregates throughout
the microgel (1 μm diameter and 10 μm length, Supporting Information Figure 9).
Figure 3
Characterization of magnetoceptive
microgels. (a) SPION-retention of 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A hydrogels,
blended with different polymer diluents, revealed a very high retention
capacity, especially for PEG-OH 0.2 kDa based gels. (b) Released iron
amount over time (cumulative) from hydrogels, consisting of 20 wt/vol
% star-PEG-A diluted with PEG-OH 0.2 kDa, including the iron amounts
after extraction and after incubation for 28 days (+ means below sensitive
region of device). (c) Incorporation of 400 μg/mL randomly distributed
SPIONs allowed for alignment in a 100 mT magnetic field. (d) When
the microgel direction along the magnetic field lines remained coherent
(<0.1%/s coherency change over 5 s), they were considered to be
aligned, which allowed the determination of orientation times (Figure S10). (e) Fixation of magnetically aligned
microgels in a surrounding fibrin gel and the distribution histogram
by OrientationJ (Fourier gradient). Scale bars are 50 μm. Green,
fluorescein; red, Rhodamine-labeled fibrinogen. Data presented as
average ± s.d. and statistical significance performed using two-way
ANOVA with Bonferroni comparison (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001).
Characterization of magnetoceptive
microgels. (a) SPION-retention of 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A hydrogels,
blended with different polymer diluents, revealed a very high retention
capacity, especially for PEG-OH 0.2 kDa based gels. (b) Released iron
amount over time (cumulative) from hydrogels, consisting of 20 wt/vol
% star-PEG-A diluted with PEG-OH 0.2 kDa, including the iron amounts
after extraction and after incubation for 28 days (+ means below sensitive
region of device). (c) Incorporation of 400 μg/mL randomly distributed
SPIONs allowed for alignment in a 100 mT magnetic field. (d) When
the microgel direction along the magnetic field lines remained coherent
(<0.1%/s coherency change over 5 s), they were considered to be
aligned, which allowed the determination of orientation times (Figure S10). (e) Fixation of magnetically aligned
microgels in a surrounding fibrin gel and the distribution histogram
by OrientationJ (Fourier gradient). Scale bars are 50 μm. Green,
fluorescein; red, Rhodamine-labeled fibrinogen. Data presented as
average ± s.d. and statistical significance performed using two-way
ANOVA with Bonferroni comparison (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001).The analysis of the magnetic response was performed with
microgels fabricated with 20 wt/vol % star-PEG-A and 0.2 kDa PEG-OH
as the diluent to obtain maximal
SPION retention. The orientation time was determined via a software-based
orientation analysis (ImageJ plugin OrientationJ), which evaluated
every pixel of the image based on a structure tensor (Supporting Information Figure S10a). Distributing
400 μg SPIONs/mL, corresponding to 0.0046 vol %, randomly throughout
the microgels (50 × 5 × 5 μm3) resulted
in longitudinal alignment in a magnetic field of 100 mT within 36.4
± 4.9 s (Figure c,d, Supporting Information Figure 10b, Movie 1). Increasing the SPION concentration
to 1000 μg/mL (0.0114 vol %) or increasing the magnetic field
to 300 mT resulted in shorter orientation times of 19.8 ± 2.2
and 27.6 ± 2.1 s, respectively. Microgels with a concentration
of 1000 μg/mL in 300 mT started to move within the dispersion
and interact with each other, causing aggregation (Supporting Information Figure 10c, Movie 2). These observations are in contrast to a report by Nunes
et al.,[33] which demonstrated that, prior
to curing, magnetic prealignment of the SPIONs into chainlike structures
was required to orient rod-shaped particles (aspect ratio below 3).
As the magnetic response is mostly geometry-driven, the higher aspect
ratio of the presented microgels (aspect ratio of 10) may explain
the difference in observation. Previously, solid SPION-coated microrods
with the same aspect ratio of 10 were demonstrated to exhibit an ultrahigh
magnetic response (UHMR).[21] The measured
orientation times here suggest that the dipole interactions between
the SPIONs, distributed randomly inside the dimension-tailored microgels,
were robust enough to obviate the need to prealign the SPIONs.[32b]To interlock the oriented microgels,
a surrounding hydrogel precursor solution was cross-linked. Both the
kinetics of the magnetic response of the microgels and the gelation
time of the matrix hydrogel were tuned to achieve optimal alignment.
We chose human fibrin as a model for the surrounding cell-adhesive
hydrogel and its gelation time was controlled to approximately 1 min
by using a thrombin concentration of 0.125 U/mL to activate the fibrin
precursor fibrinogen.[34] Oriented microgels
were fixed inside a fibrin matrix (Figure e), creating a hybrid hydrogel with global
unidirectional anisotropy (Anisogel).
Directed Cell and Nerve
Growth in Injectable Anisotropic Hydrogel
The obtained Anisogel
was then applied to induce directed cell growth. To influence the
orientation of cell growth, microgels functioned as barriers that
initially do not support cell ingrowth, which is in contrast to the
surrounding hydrogel. Yet, microgels need to enable sufficient mass
transport and degradation over time. Therefore, microgels with a star-PEG-A
content of 20 wt/vol %, prepared with PEG-OH 0.2 kDa as diluent, were
chosen for subsequent experiments, as these also demonstrated maximal
SPION retention. To minimize cytotoxic effects, a low SPION concentration
of 400 μg/mL was applied. The cytotoxicity of SPION-doped star-PEG-A
hydrogels was tested in vitro by a cell viability assay (Supporting Information Figure 11a), revealing
no release of cytotoxic hydrogel components over the course of 24
h. The hydrogel media extract did not reduce cell survival or proliferation
rates over a period of 5 days. To study the effect of aligned microgels
on cell morphology, L929mouse-derived fibroblasts (500 cells/μL)
were mixed within the Anisogel solution before cross-linking and kept
within a magnetic field of 130 mT for 10 min until completion of fibrin
gelation (Supporting Information Figure 11b, c). We found a microgel concentration-dependent effect on cytoskeleton
elongation and orientation. A hybrid hydrogel with 0.5 to 1.0 vol
% microgels showed fibroblast growth in all three dimensions (Supporting Information Figure 12). However, by
applying a concentration of 1.5 vol % microgels or higher, which corresponds
to a mean microgel distance of 27.7 μm or less, fibroblasts
were able to sense the structural guidance cues and grew one-dimensionally
along the microgel orientation (Figure a,b; Supporting Information Figure 12). As star-PEG-A does not contain cell adhesion sequences,[35] the cells attached to the fibrin gel, whereas
the microgels functioned as physical barriers to induce cell orientation.
This reveals that at minimal degrees of material anisotropy, cells
decide to grow unidirectionally in 3D, regardless of the fact that
the geometrical constrain for orientation, sensed by the cells, is
still minimum and would allow nonaligned growth.
Figure 4
Ability of the Anisogel
to align fibroblasts and guide nerves. Fibrin hydrogels were mixed
with different concentrations (1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 vol %) of soft microgels,
which aligned in a magnetic field of 130 mT. (a) Premixed fibroblasts
extended along the longitudinal microgel axis (green, fluorescein),
visible by the stretched F-actin filaments (red, Alexa Fluor 594 phalloidin),
depending on the microgel concentration. (b) Quantification of single
fibroblast orientation in the Anisogel with different microgel concentrations
in relation to microgel orientation (green arrow), n meaning the total number of randomly analyzed cells from different
gels. (c) DRGs were positioned in hydrogels with 3 vol % microgels
(green, fluorescein), containing random or magnetically aligned microgels.
β-tubulin staining (red, Alexa Fluor 633) revealed neurite outgrowth
parallel to the aligned microgels (outside full white circle). (d)
Distribution of neurite and microgel orientation, as well as the respective
full width at half-maximum (fwhm). The white full circles mark from
which distance neurite extension was quantified. The white dotted
circle represents the edge of the DRG body. The white box marks the
magnified regions, depicted on the right. Scale bars in (a) are 50
μm
and in (c) are 200 μm.
Ability of the Anisogel
to align fibroblasts and guide nerves. Fibrin hydrogels were mixed
with different concentrations (1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 vol %) of soft microgels,
which aligned in a magnetic field of 130 mT. (a) Premixed fibroblasts
extended along the longitudinal microgel axis (green, fluorescein),
visible by the stretched F-actin filaments (red, Alexa Fluor 594phalloidin),
depending on the microgel concentration. (b) Quantification of single
fibroblast orientation in the Anisogel with different microgel concentrations
in relation to microgel orientation (green arrow), n meaning the total number of randomly analyzed cells from different
gels. (c) DRGs were positioned in hydrogels with 3 vol % microgels
(green, fluorescein), containing random or magnetically aligned microgels.
β-tubulin staining (red, Alexa Fluor 633) revealed neurite outgrowth
parallel to the aligned microgels (outside full white circle). (d)
Distribution of neurite and microgel orientation, as well as the respective
full width at half-maximum (fwhm). The white full circles mark from
which distance neurite extension was quantified. The white dotted
circle represents the edge of the DRG body. The white box marks the
magnified regions, depicted on the right. Scale bars in (a) are 50
μm
and in (c) are 200 μm.To investigate the material’s functionality with regard
to native oriented tissues, such as nerves, chicken-derived primary
dorsal root ganglions (DRGs) were applied. These were inserted into
the cast Anisogel solution during the enzymatic cross-linking of the
fibrin matrix inside a magnetic field. The constructs were cultured
for 5 days and supplemented with nerve growth factor. Initial DRG
experiments with 3 vol % microgels, which were either magnetically
aligned or left random (Figure c), revealed a clear difference with regard to the guidance
effect. Here, random microgels led to neurite infiltration without
prevalent direction, while aligned microgels induced oriented neurite
growth parallel to the noncell adhesive microgels. In this specific
example, the presence of buffer around the DRG inhibited fixed microgel
alignment adjacent to the DRG, which initially led to random nerve
growth but, importantly, once the extending neurites entered the region
with the oriented microgels (full white circle) linear neurite infiltration
was induced along their orientation. In addition, neurite extension
perpendicular to the microgel orientation was blocked. Structure analysis
of the images quantified the orientation of the infiltrating neurites
in the matrices and confirmed the induced directionality of extending
axons (Figure d).
The full widths at half-maximum (fwhm) of the neurite and microgel
orientation distribution were 38° and 19°, respectively,
in comparison to 180° for both in the case of nonoriented microgels.To determine which degree of structure in three dimensions is required
to align infiltrating neurites, DRGs were cultivated within Anisogels
with different microgel contents (Figure a). Contrary to the reported results with
fibroblasts (Supporting Information Figure 12b), 1.0 vol % aligned microgels (mean intermicrogel distance of 33.6
μm) in fibrin was sufficient to orient neurite outgrowth. An
increase in microgel content to 2.0 vol % did not significantly enhance
nerve guidance, while a decrease to 0.25 vol % was insufficient to
align the neurites. These findings are supported by the quantification
of the DRG alignment via OrientationJ (Figure b), showing fwhm’s for aligned nerve
growth of 73.7° ± 37.1° for 1 vol % and 55.7 ±
36.7° for 2 vol %, which are both significantly lower than the
fwhm’s calculated for 0.25 vol % and fibrin without microgels
(Figure c). Even though
a small reduction in the fwhm was observed from 1 to 2 vol %, this
difference was not statistically significant. Although up to 99% of
the volume is available for the infiltrating neurites to grow randomly,
the minimal structure is sufficient to trigger the nerves’
decision toward oriented neurite extension.
Figure 5
Nerve cells decide to
orient in an Anisogel with minimal structural guidance. (a) DRGs (red,
Alexa Fluor 633) were inserted in fibrin and Anisogels with 0.25,
1, and 2 vol % microgels (green, fluorescein), revealing that at least
1 vol % is required for nerve guidance. (b) Quantification of the
images in (a) substantiates the qualitative findings that 1 vol %
microgels is required with no significant improvement for 2 vol %.
(c) Full width at half-maximum (fwhm) of quantified neurite extension
within the Anisogel (0.25, 1, and 2 vol % microgels) or fibrin. Images
were quantified by the imageJ plugin OrientationJ, starting at the
edge of the DRG body (marked by white circle) (n =
3). (d) Extension of single primary nerve cells mixed within fibrin
and Anisogels with 0.25 vol %, 0.5 vol %, and 1 vol %, supporting
the threshold of 1 vol % to obtain a functional Anisogel. Data presented
as average ± s.d. and statistical significance performed using
two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni comparison (*p <
0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001).
Scale bars in (a) are 200 μm and in (d) 50 μm.
Nerve cells decide to
orient in an Anisogel with minimal structural guidance. (a) DRGs (red,
Alexa Fluor 633) were inserted in fibrin and Anisogels with 0.25,
1, and 2 vol % microgels (green, fluorescein), revealing that at least
1 vol % is required for nerve guidance. (b) Quantification of the
images in (a) substantiates the qualitative findings that 1 vol %
microgels is required with no significant improvement for 2 vol %.
(c) Full width at half-maximum (fwhm) of quantified neurite extension
within the Anisogel (0.25, 1, and 2 vol % microgels) or fibrin. Images
were quantified by the imageJ plugin OrientationJ, starting at the
edge of the DRG body (marked by white circle) (n =
3). (d) Extension of single primary nerve cells mixed within fibrin
and Anisogels with 0.25 vol %, 0.5 vol %, and 1 vol %, supporting
the threshold of 1 vol % to obtain a functional Anisogel. Data presented
as average ± s.d. and statistical significance performed using
two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni comparison (*p <
0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001).
Scale bars in (a) are 200 μm and in (d) 50 μm.In order to investigate the effect of structural
guidance on single neurons, DRGs were dissociated and primary chicken-derived
neurons were isolated. The single neurons were cultured in a fibrin
gel or Anisogels with 0.25, 0.5, and 1 vol %, confirming that 1 vol
% microgels were sufficient to achieve a strong guidance effect (Figure d, Movie S3). In the case of 0.5 vol % microgels, neurons could
still grow in an aligned manner but would sometime alter their direction
to then continue growing parallel to the oriented direction again.
These results validated that a minimal amount of structural guidance
can trigger nerves to grow in a linear manner, demonstrating the applicability
of an Anisogel for the regeneration of sensitive and oriented tissues.
Conclusion
In summary, we present a novel hierarchically designed material
class with the ability to direct cell and nerve growth and the potential
to regenerate sensitive tissues, which require injectable anisotropic
structures. Magnetoceptive, anisometric microgels were applied as
building blocks to create a unidirectional structure. The developed
technology provides high control over numerous parameters, such as
microgel dimensions, shape, stiffness, porosity, water and SPION content.
This enables tailoring of the microgel properties and thus the macro-
and microenvironment according to the cell’s and tissue’s
demands. We demonstrate that depending on the sensitivity of the cell
type, a minimal microgel concentration is required to trigger cell
alignment in 3D. Interestingly, both fibroblasts and nerve cells were
able to decide to grow unidirectionally inside the anisotropic injectable
hydrogels at relatively large distances between the structural guidance
cues. The developed Anisogel represents a novel and versatile tissue
regenerative material, which fills a gap between the existing implantable
constructs and injectable materials. It is the first biomaterial that
can achieve highly controlled and ordered structures in situ after
injection to guide cell and nerve growth. This feature has the potential
to enhance tissue functionality that depends on its structural organization
and could be groundbreaking as supporting therapeutic material for
spinal cord repair.
Authors: Shengqing Xu; Zhihong Nie; Minseok Seo; Patrick Lewis; Eugenia Kumacheva; Howard A Stone; Piotr Garstecki; Douglas B Weibel; Irina Gitlin; George M Whitesides Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2005-01-21 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Yang Yang; Laura De Laporte; Marina L Zelivyanskaya; Kevin J Whittlesey; Aileen J Anderson; Brian J Cummings; Lonnie D Shea Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Carl Neuerburg; Stefan Recknagel; Jörg Fiedler; Jürgen Groll; Martin Moeller; Kristina Bruellhoff; Heiko Reichel; Anita Ignatius; Rolf E Brenner Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2013-06-26 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Aleksander Skardal; Mahesh Devarasetty; Hyun-Wook Kang; Ivy Mead; Colin Bishop; Thomas Shupe; Sang Jin Lee; John Jackson; James Yoo; Shay Soker; Anthony Atala Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Christopher D L Johnson; Debmalya Ganguly; Jonathan M Zuidema; Thomas J Cardinal; Alexis M Ziemba; Kathryn R Kearns; Simon M McCarthy; Deanna M Thompson; Ganpati Ramanath; Diana A Borca-Tasciuc; Silvio Dutz; Ryan J Gilbert Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 9.229
Authors: Christopher S Lacko; Ishita Singh; Monica A Wall; Andrew R Garcia; Stacy L Porvasnik; Carlos Rinaldi; Christine E Schmidt Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Nureddin Ashammakhi; Han-Jun Kim; Arshia Ehsanipour; Rebecca D Bierman; Outi Kaarela; Chengbin Xue; Ali Khademhosseini; Stephanie K Seidlits Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 6.389
Authors: Harrison L Hiraki; Daniel L Matera; Michael J Rose; Robert N Kent; Connor W Todd; Mark E Stout; Anya E Wank; Maria C Schiavone; Samuel J DePalma; Alexander A Zarouk; Brendon M Baker Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2021-06-16