Literature DB >> 31952947

Using engineering models to shorten cryoprotectant loading time for the vitrification of articular cartilage.

Nadia Shardt1, Zhirong Chen1, Shuying Claire Yuan1, Kezhou Wu2, Leila Laouar3, Nadr M Jomha3, Janet A W Elliott4.   

Abstract

Osteochondral allograft transplantation can treat full thickness cartilage and bone lesions in the knee and other joints, but the lack of widespread articular cartilage banking limits the quantity of cartilage available for size and contour matching. To address the limited availability of cartilage, vitrification can be used to store harvested joint tissues indefinitely. Our group's reported vitrification protocol [Biomaterials 33 (2012) 6061-6068] takes 9.5 h to load cryoprotectants into intact articular cartilage on bone and achieves high cell viability, but further optimization is needed to shorten this protocol for clinical use. Herein, we use engineering models to calculate the spatial and temporal distributions of cryoprotectant concentration, solution vitrifiability, and freezing point for each step of the 9.5-h protocol. We then incorporate the following major design choices for developing a new shorter protocol: (i) all cryoprotectant loading solution concentrations are reduced, (ii) glycerol is removed as a cryoprotectant, and (iii) an equilibration step is introduced to flatten the final cryoprotectant concentration profiles. We also use a new criterion-the spatially and temporally resolved prediction of solution vitrifiability-to assess whether a protocol will be successful instead of requiring that each cryoprotectant individually reaches a certain concentration. A total cryoprotectant loading time of 7 h is targeted, and our new 7-h protocol is predicted to achieve a level of vitrifiability comparable to the proven 9.5-h protocol throughout the cartilage thickness.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Articular cartilage; Cryoprotectant; Engineering model; Fick's law; Toxicity; Vitrifiability; Vitrification

Year:  2020        PMID: 31952947     DOI: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2020.01.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cryobiology        ISSN: 0011-2240            Impact factor:   2.487


  5 in total

1.  Multiple cryoprotectant toxicity model for vitrification solution optimization.

Authors:  Ross M Warner; Kevin S Brown; James D Benson; Ali Eroglu; Adam Z Higgins
Journal:  Cryobiology       Date:  2022-09-13       Impact factor: 2.728

2.  Toward embryo cryopreservation-on-a-chip: A standalone microfluidic platform for gradual loading of cryoprotectants to minimize cryoinjuries.

Authors:  Pouria Tirgar; Fatemeh Sarmadi; Mojgan Najafi; Parinaz Kazemi; Sina AzizMohseni; Samaneh Fayazi; Ghazaleh Zandi; Nikta Ziaie; Aida Shoushtari Zadeh Naseri; Allen Ehrlicher; Mojtaba Dashtizad
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 2.800

3.  Vitrification of particulated articular cartilage via calculated protocols.

Authors:  Kezhou Wu; Nadia Shardt; Leila Laouar; Janet A W Elliott; Nadr M Jomha
Journal:  NPJ Regen Med       Date:  2021-03-19

4.  A Cryoprotectant-Gel Composite Designed to Preserve Articular Cartilage during Frozen Osteoarticular Autograft Reconstruction for Malignant Bone Tumors: An Animal-Based Study.

Authors:  Chao-Ming Chen; Yi-Chun Chen; Jir-You Wang; Cheng-Fong Chen; Kuang-Yu Chao; Po-Kuei Wu; Wei-Ming Chen
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Vitrification of Intact Porcine Femoral Condyle Allografts Using an Optimized Approach.

Authors:  Kezhou Wu; Leila Laouar; Janet A W Elliott; Nadr M Jomha
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 4.634

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.