| Literature DB >> 28787946 |
Flávia Gonçalves1, Ricardo Bentini2, Mariana C Burrows3, Ana C O Carreira4,5, Patricia M Kossugue5, Mari C Sogayar4,5, Luiz H Catalani6.
Abstract
Synthetic and natural polymer association is a promising tool in tissue engineering. The aim of this study was to compare five methodologies for producing hybrid scaffolds for cell culture using poly-l-lactide (PLLA) and collagen: functionalization of PLLA electrospun by (1) dialkylamine and collagen immobilization with glutaraldehyde and by (2) hydrolysis and collagen immobilization with carbodiimide chemistry; (3) co-electrospinning of PLLA/chloroform and collagen/hexafluoropropanol (HFP) solutions; (4) co-electrospinning of PLLA/chloroform and collagen/acetic acid solutions and (5) electrospinning of a co-solution of PLLA and collagen using HFP. These materials were evaluated based on their morphology, mechanical properties, ability to induce cell proliferation and alkaline phosphatase activity upon submission of mesenchymal stem cells to basal or osteoblastic differentiation medium (ODM). Methods (1) and (2) resulted in a decrease in mechanical properties, whereas methods (3), (4) and (5) resulted in materials of higher tensile strength and osteogenic differentiation. Materials yielded by methods (2), (3) and (5) promoted osteoinduction even in the absence of ODM. The results indicate that the scaffold based on the PLLA/collagen blend exhibited optimal mechanical properties and the highest capacity for osteodifferentiation and was the best choice for collagen incorporation into PLLA in bone repair applications.Entities:
Keywords: collagen; electrospinning; scaffolds; synthetic polymer
Year: 2015 PMID: 28787946 PMCID: PMC5455262 DOI: 10.3390/ma8020408
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Total carboxyl group concentration (mol/g) inserted into PLLA scaffolds as a function of the reaction time (min).
| Material | Hydrolysis time (s) # | Carboxyl group concentration (mol/g) |
|---|---|---|
| PLLA | 0 | (3.7 ± 0.5) × 10−5 |
| 20 | (5.6 ± 0.9) × 10−5 | |
| 45 | (5.5 ± 1.0) × 10−5 | |
| 60 | (5.8 ± 0.7) × 10−5 * | |
| 180 | (5.9 ± 1.0) × 10−5 * |
Reaction with 0.1 M NaOH; * Significant difference when compared to PLLA scaffolds without hydrolysis (0 s); p < 0.05.
Total amine group concentration (mol/g) inserted into PLLA scaffolds as a function of reaction time (min).
| Material | Aminolysis time (min) # | Amine group concentration (mol/g) |
|---|---|---|
| PLLA | 0.5 | (1.2 ± 0.2) × 10−5 |
| 1 | (1.6 ± 0.2) × 10−5 | |
| 3 | (1.9 ± 0.2) × 10−5 ** | |
| 5 | (3.2 ± 0.2) × 10−5 *** |
# Reaction at 0.008 g/mol of HAD; ** Significant difference when compared to PLLA scaffold with 0.5 s of aminolysis at p < 0.01 and *** p < 0.001.
Means and standard deviations of collagen (wt%) inserted into the scaffolds obtained from elemental analyses and the ninhydrin test.
| Material | Collagen concentration (wt%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Elemental analysis | Ninhydrin test | |
| PLLA | 0 | - |
| PC_hydrolysis | 1.4 ± 0.5 | 1.5 ± 0.2 |
| PC_aminolysis | 1.5 ± 0.6 | 0.30 ± 0.05 |
| PC_blend | 47 ± 1 | - |
| PC_cf_HFP | 71 ± 10 | - |
| PC_cf AA | 15 ± 6 | - |
Figure 1SEM images (×1000 magnification) of electrospun scaffolds: (A) PLLA; (B) PLLA after hydrolysis and collagen incorporation with EDC; (C) PLLA after aminolysis and collagen incorporation with GTA; (D) PLLA/collagen electrospun by blending; (E) PLLA/collagen electrospun by co-electrospinning and using HFP as the collagen solvent; and (F) PLLA/collagen electrospun by co-electrospinning and using acetic acid solution as the collagen solvent.
Mechanical properties of PLLA/collagen electrospun materials: means and standard deviations of Young’s modulus 1, tensile strength and elongation at break values of the six scaffolds tested.
| Material | Elongation at break (%) | Tensile strength (MPa) | Young’s modulus 1 (GPa) |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLLA | 39 ± 8 | 18 ± 3 | 0.19 ± 0.03 |
| PC_hydrolysis | 14 ± 2 *** | 4.8 ± 0.8 * | 0.07 ± 0.01 |
| PC_aminolysis | 5.8 ± 0.3 *** | 7 ± 1 | 0.10 ± 0.02 |
| PC_blend | (5 ± 1) × 10 1 | (8 ± 1) × 10 1 *** | 1.0 ± 0.1 *** |
| PC_cs_HFP | 6 ± 1 *** | 38 ± 6 *** | 1.4 ± 0.2 *** |
| PC_cs_AA | 14 ± 2 *** | 24 ± 4 | 0.7 ± 0.1 *** |
1 Young’s modulus is calculated from the linear region of the stress-strain curves; * Significant difference when compared to PLLA scaffold at p < 0.05 and *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2Fluorescence confocal images (100× magnification) of cells on electrospun scaffolds: (A) PLLA; (B) PLLA after hydrolysis and collagen incorporation with EDC; (C) PLLA after aminolysis and collagen incorporation with GTA; (D) PLLA/collagen electrospun by blending; (E) PLLA/collagen electrospun by co-electrospinning and using HFP as the collagen solvent; and (F) PLLA/collagen electrospun by co-electrospinning and using acetic acid solution as the collagen solvent.
Figure 3Incorporation of 3H-thymidine (CPM) into the DNA of SHEDs after (A) 0; (B) 3; (C) 7; (D) 10; and (E) 14 days of culture on different PLLA and collagen scaffolds. Statistically significant difference at * p < 0.05, ** p < 00.01 and *** p < 00.001.
ALP activity (U/L) means and standard deviations in SHEDs cultured on scaffolds under ODM and DMEM conditions.
| Material | ALP (U/L) | |
|---|---|---|
| ODM | DMEM | |
| PLLA | 0.16 ± 0.05 | Not detected |
| PC_hydrolysis | 0.60 ± 0.08 | 0.15 ± 0.04 |
| PC_aminolysis | 0.5 ± 0.1 | Not detected |
| PC_blend | 1.2 ± 0.1 *** | 0.8 ± 0.1 |
| PC_Cf_HFP | 1.0 ± 0.2 *** | 0.34 ± 0.08 ** |
| PC_cf_AA | 1.6 ± 0.3 *** | Not detected |
| Control | 1.3 ± 0.1 *** | Not detected |
*** Significant difference of ALP in ODM medium when compared to the PLLA scaffold at p < 0.001; ** Significant difference of ALP in DMEM medium when compared to the PLLA/collagen blended material at p < 0.01.