| Literature DB >> 30445700 |
Simone Sprio1, Elisabetta Campodoni2, Monica Sandri3, Lorenzo Preti4,5, Tobias Keppler6, Frank A Müller7, Nicola M Pugno8,9,10, Anna Tampieri11.
Abstract
The regeneration of dental tissues is a still an unmet clinical need; in fact, no therapies have been completely successful in regenerating dental tissue complexes such as periodontium, which is also due to the lack of scaffolds that are able to guide and direct cell fate towards the reconstruction of different mineralized and non-mineralized dental tissues. In this respect, the present work develops a novel multifunctional hybrid scaffold recapitulating the different features of alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, and cementum by integrating the biomineralization process, and tape casting and electrospinning techniques. The scaffold is endowed with a superparamagnetic ability, thanks to the use of a biocompatible, bioactive superparamagnetic apatite phase, as a mineral component that is able to promote osteogenesis and to be activated by remote magnetic signals. The periodontal scaffold was obtained by engineering three different layers, recapitulating the relevant compositional and microstructural features of the target tissues, into a monolithic multifunctional graded device. Physico-chemical, morphological, and ultrastructural analyses, in association with preliminary in vitro investigations carried out with mesenchymal stem cells, confirm that the final scaffold exhibits a good mimicry of the periodontal tissue complex, with excellent cytocompatibility and cell viability, making it very promising for regenerative applications in dentistry.Entities:
Keywords: biomimetic hybrid scaffold; biomineralization; collagen; electrospinning; periodontal regeneration; superparamagnetic hydroxyapatite
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30445700 PMCID: PMC6274723 DOI: 10.3390/ijms19113604
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1(a) XRD spectra of the FeHA/Coll scaffold compared to HA and magnetite powders; (b) FTIR analysis of the FeHA/Coll scaffold compared to collagen and HA powder; (c) ICP features of FeHA/Coll; (d) Thermal decomposition profile (TG) of the FeHA/Coll scaffold; (e) Magnetization curves at T = 310 K of FeHA/Coll scaffold measured curves in black, nonsaturating and saturating paramagnetic contributions, in blue and red respectively.
Figure 2(a,b) SEM images of FeHA/Coll scaffold at different magnification (c) TEM images of FeHA/Coll scaffold compared to magnetite TEM image (inset). Scale bars: (a) 100 um, (b) 5 um, (c) 200 nm.
Figure 3SEM images of Coll scaffold at (a) high magnification; (b) medium magnification; (c) low magnification. Scale bars of (a–c) is 100 µm. In the inset of Figure 3a is showed a SEM image of Coll fibres at high magnification. Scale bar of inset is 500 nm.
Figure 4(a) XRD spectra of the FeHA/CA scaffold compared to FeHA and HA powders; (b) ICP features of FeHA; (c) Thermal decomposition profile (TG) of the FeHA/CA scaffold compared to FeHA powder; (d) FTIR analysis of the FeHA/CA scaffold compared to the FeHA powder and cellulose acetate; (e) Superparamagnetic contribution of the FeHA/CA scaffold compared to FeHA powder.
Figure 5(a,b) SEM images of FeHA at different magnifications. (c,d) images of FeHA/CA at different magnifications. Scale bars: (a) 1 μm, (b) 200 nm, (c) 200 μm, (d) 10 μm.
Figure 6Schematic process of the FeHA/Coll–Coll–FeHA/CA tri-layer scaffold mimicking the periodontal apparatus.
Figure 7Cell viability of cell-seed FeHA/Coll (a), Coll (b), and FeHA/CA (c) scaffolds analyzed by the Live/Dead assay at a magnification of 20×.
Biological evaluation of the cytotoxicity of the material composing the tri-layer scaffold.
| Materials | % of Viability | Results |
|---|---|---|
| FeHA/Coll | 71 | Non cytotoxic |
| Coll | 88 | Non cytotoxic |
| FeHA/CA | 73 | Non cytotoxic |