| Literature DB >> 30984748 |
Ting Tian1,2,3, Weihan Xie2,3,4, Wendong Gao2,3,4, Gang Wang2,3,4, Lei Zeng2,3,4, Guohou Miao5, Bo Lei6, Zhanyi Lin1,7, Xiaofeng Chen2,3,4.
Abstract
Constructing the interconnected porous biomaterials scaffolds with osteogenesis and angiogenesis capacity is extremely important for efficient bone tissue engineering. Herein, we fabricated a bioactive micro-nano composite scaffolds with excellent in vitro osteogenesis and angiogenesis capacity, based on poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) incorporated with micro-nano bioactive glass (MNBG). The results showed that the addition of MNBG enlarged the pore size, increased the compressive modulus (4 times improvement), enhanced the physiological stability and apatite-forming ability of porous PLGA scaffolds. The in vitro studies indicated that the PLGA-MNBG porous scaffold could enhance the mouse bone mesenchymal stem cells (mBMSCs) attachment, proliferation, and promote the expression of osteogenesis marker (ALP). Additionally, PLGA-MNBG could also support the attachment and proliferation of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs), and significantly enhanced the expression of angiogenesis marker (CD31) of HUVECs. The as-prepared bioactive PLGA-MNBG nanocomposites scaffolds with good osteogenesis and angiogenesis probably have a promising application for bone tissue regeneration.Entities:
Keywords: bioactive glass; bone regeneration; micro-nano particles; nanocomposites scaffolds; osteogenesis
Year: 2019 PMID: 30984748 PMCID: PMC6449679 DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2019.00186
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Chem ISSN: 2296-2646 Impact factor: 5.221
Figure 1Characterizations of MNBG. (A) SEM image indicating the morphology of MNBG with uniform monodisperse sphere. (B) EDS spectra showing the existence of Si, Ca and P. (C) XRD pattern demonstrating the representative amorphous state of MNBG. (D) The N2 adsorption-desorption isotherms and pore size distributions of MNBG.
Figure 2Characterizations of PLGA-MNBG scaffold. (A) SEM image showing the porous structure of composite scaffolds. (B) Pores diameter distribution of different composition of PLGA-MNBG scaffolds.
Figure 3Mechanical property evaluation of PLGA-MNBG composite scaffolds. (A) Compressive stress-strain curve as various content of MNBG. (B) Compressive modulus of composite scaffolds depended on MNBG concentration (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compare to 0% MNBG).
Figure 4Biodegradation and apatite-forming ability of composite scaffolds in SBF. (A) Mass loss behaviors of scaffolds in SBF during 28 days immersing. (B,C) XRD patterns of scaffolds after soaking in SBF for 3 days (B) and 7 days (C). (D–F) Ions release curves of scaffolds for (D) Si; (E) Ca; (F) P after soaking in SBF for 3 and 7 days.
The ratio of Ca to P after scaffolds immersion in SBF for 3 days.
| 0% MNBG | 2.64 | 97.1 | 0.02 |
| 10% MNBG | 8.1 | 2.14 | 3.78 |
| 20% MNBG | 19.75 | 10 | 1.97 |
| 30% MNBG | 59.62 | 36.52 | 1.63 |
| 40% MNBG | 56.85 | 31.0 | 1.83 |
The ratio of Ca to P after scaffolds immersion in SBF for 7 days.
| 0% MNBG | 1.54 | 98.4 | 0.01 |
| 10% MNBG | 10.97 | 7.08 | 1.54 |
| 20% MNBG | 16.41 | 13 | 1.26 |
| 30% MNBG | 31.5 | 22.77 | 1.38 |
| 40% MNBG | 48.51 | 41.03 | 1.18 |
Figure 5Cell attachment and cell viability evaluation on scaffolds. (A) SEM images showing the mBMSCs attachment and spreading at day 1 (Red row in SEM images). (B,C) Cell viability detected by Live-Dead assay suggesting the good cell viability on the surface of scaffolds at (B) day 1 and (C) day 5. Green represents living cells and red represents dead cells.
Figure 6Proliferation and ALP activity analysis of mBMSCs on PLGA-MNBG scaffolds. (A) CCK-8 assay indicating the cell proliferation at day 1, 4 and 7. (B) ALP activity test cells after incubated on various scaffolds for 7 and 14 days. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compare to 0% MNBG).
Figure 7HUVECs viability evaluation cultured on PLGA-MNBG scaffolds with various MNBG concentrations detected by Live-Dead assay at day 1, 4, and 7. Green represents living cells and red represents dead cells.
Figure 8Expression of CD31 in HUVECs by an immunofluorescence assay. Immunostaining images of CD31 (green) and DAPI (blue) for different scaffolds.