The construction of scaffolds and subsequent incorporation of cells and biologics have been widely investigated to regenerate damaged tissues. Scaffolds act as a template to guide tissue formation, and their characteristics have a considerable impact on the regenerative process. Whereas many technologies exist to induce specific two-dimensional (2D) morphologies into biomaterials, the introduction of three-dimensional (3D) micromorphologies into individual pore walls of scaffolds produced from biological molecules such as collagen poses a challenge. We here report the use of dicarboxylic acids to induce specific micromorphologies in collagen scaffolds and evaluate their effect on cellular migration and differentiation. Insoluble type I collagen fibrils were suspended in monocarboxylic and dicarboxylic acids of different concentrations, and unidirectional and random pore scaffolds were constructed by freezing and lyophilization. The application of various acids and concentrations resulted in variations in 3D micromorphologies, including wall structure, wall thickness, and pore size. The use of dicarboxylic acids resulted in acid-specific micromorphologies, whereas monocarboxylic acids did not. Dicarboxylic acids with an odd or even number of C-atoms resulted in frayed/fibrillar or smooth wall structures, respectively, with varying appearances. The formation of micromorphologies was concentration-dependent. In vitro analysis indicated the cytocompatibility of scaffolds, and micromorphology-related cell behavior was indicated by enhanced myosin staining and myosin heavy chain gene expression for C2C12 myoblasts cultured on scaffolds with frayedlike micromorphologies compared to those with smooth micromorphologies. In conclusion, porous collagen scaffolds with various intrawall 3D micromorphologies can be constructed by application of dicarboxylic acids, superimposing the second level of morphology to the overall scaffold structure. Acid crystal formation is key to the specific micromorphologies observed and can be explained by the odd/even theory for dicarboxylic acids. Scaffolds with a 3D micrometer-defined topography may be used as a screening platform to select optimal substrates for the regeneration of specific tissues.
The construction of scaffolds and subsequent incorporation of cells and biologics have been widely investigated to regenerate damaged tissues. Scaffolds act as a template to guide tissue formation, and their characteristics have a considerable impact on the regenerative process. Whereas many technologies exist to induce specific two-dimensional (2D) morphologies into biomaterials, the introduction of three-dimensional (3D) micromorphologies into individual pore walls of scaffolds produced from biological molecules such as collagen poses a challenge. We here report the use of dicarboxylic acids to induce specific micromorphologies in collagen scaffolds and evaluate their effect on cellular migration and differentiation. Insoluble type I collagen fibrils were suspended in monocarboxylic and dicarboxylic acids of different concentrations, and unidirectional and random pore scaffolds were constructed by freezing and lyophilization. The application of various acids and concentrations resulted in variations in 3D micromorphologies, including wall structure, wall thickness, and pore size. The use of dicarboxylic acids resulted in acid-specific micromorphologies, whereas monocarboxylic acids did not. Dicarboxylic acids with an odd or even number of C-atoms resulted in frayed/fibrillar or smooth wall structures, respectively, with varying appearances. The formation of micromorphologies was concentration-dependent. In vitro analysis indicated the cytocompatibility of scaffolds, and micromorphology-related cell behavior was indicated by enhanced myosin staining and myosin heavy chain gene expression for C2C12 myoblasts cultured on scaffolds with frayedlike micromorphologies compared to those with smooth micromorphologies. In conclusion, porous collagen scaffolds with various intrawall 3D micromorphologies can be constructed by application of dicarboxylic acids, superimposing the second level of morphology to the overall scaffold structure. Acid crystal formation is key to the specific micromorphologies observed and can be explained by the odd/even theory for dicarboxylic acids. Scaffolds with a 3D micrometer-defined topography may be used as a screening platform to select optimal substrates for the regeneration of specific tissues.
The field of tissue engineering
strives to reconstruct the structural
and functional properties of damaged, diseased, or lost tissues.[1] Its general strategy includes the construction
of supportive biomaterials (scaffolds), providing a template guiding
tissue formation, and the subsequent loading of scaffolds with biological
compounds and cells.[2] The selection of
scaffolding materials is key since they have a considerable impact
on the regenerative process.[3] The interaction
between cells and scaffolds is a complex interplay where scaffolds
influence cell fate and cells modulate the scaffolds. Properties such
as mechanical strength, degradation rate, pore size, and interconnectivity
all influence cellular growth and function.[4,5] Next
to the overall morphology such as pore size and direction, micromorphologies
in the scaffold may regulate cellular behavior. Three-dimensional
(3D) topographical features have been shown to regulate cellular migration,
attachment, viability, and differentiation.[6,7] It
has, for instance, been shown that bone marrow-derived mesenchymal
stem cells preferentially adhere to ridged surfaces[8] and that embryonic stem cells differentiate toward the
neuronal lineage on ridged or grooved surfaces, without the use of
any differentiation-inducing agents.[9] Attachment
and proliferation of chondrocytes are enhanced by the incorporation
of ridged or grooved surfaces.[10] Several
physical and chemical micro- and nanofabrication patterning techniques
are available to introduce specific morphologies (e.g., ridges, pillars,
pits, and grooves) and distributions (e.g., random or regular). These
techniques encompass soft lithography, photolithography, electrospinning,
polymer phase separation, layer-by-layer microfluidic patterning,
three-dimensional printing, chemical vapor deposition, ion milling,
salt leaching, and reactive ion etching.[11−13] The use of
these techniques to introduce micromorphologies into scaffolds made
from biological molecules is generally limited. In addition, the introduction
of a specific micromorphology throughout the whole bioscaffold, rather
than just to the surface, is challenging. We here show the application
of dicarboxylic acids to introduce specific micromorphologies into
the individual walls of porous collagen scaffolds and evaluate its
effect on myoblasts cultured in vitro.
Experimental
Section
Scaffold Construction
Type I collagen
fibrils were isolated from bovine Achilles tendon as described. Collagen
suspensions of 0.7% (w/v) were prepared using monocarboxylic and dicarboxylic
acids. Monocarboxylic acids included formic acid (Merck, Darmstadt,
Germany), acetic acid (Scharlau, Barcelona, Spain), and propionic
acid (Merck). Dicarboxylic acids included oxalic acid (Merck), malonic
acid (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO), succinic acid (Sigma-Aldrich),
glutaric acid (Sigma-Aldrich), maleic acid (Sigma-Aldrich), and fumaric
acid (Sigma-Aldrich). An overview of the acids used (including their
IUPAC names and chemical formula) and the molarities applied is provided
in Table . After overnight
incubation at 4 °C, collagen suspensions were homogenized on
ice using a Teflon glass Potter–Elvehjem (Louwers Glass and
Ceramic Technologies, Hapert, The Netherlands) with an intervening
space of 0.35 mm (10 strokes) and deaerated by centrifugation at 117g for 30 min at 4 °C.[14]
Table 1
Overview of Acids and Concentrations
Applied To Induce Micromorphologies in Unidirectional and Random Pore
Collagen Scaffolds
To investigate
the effect of the various diluted acids on the micromorphology
of collagen scaffolds, scaffolds with unidirectional and randomly
oriented pores were constructed. Briefly, unidirectional collagen
scaffolds were prepared by freezing collagen suspensions by directional
freezing (10 mL/scaffold) using liquid nitrogen and a custom-made
wedge system, followed by lyophilization in a Zirbus freeze dryer
(Sublimator 500 II, Bad Grund, Germany).[14] Random collagen scaffolds were prepared by freezing collagen suspensions
in 6-well plates (5 mL/well) at −20 °C, followed by lyophilization.[15] Scaffolds were strengthened by vapor fixation
cross-linking using 37% formaldehyde (Scharlau) under vacuum for 30
min to improve the handling.[14]
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Scanning
electron microscopy (SEM; JEOL SEM6340F, Tokyo, Japan) was used to
investigate scaffold morphology. Scaffolds were cut longitudinally
and perpendicularly, and samples were placed on stubs and sputtered
with a thin layer of gold using a Polaron E5100 coating system.[14] Images were recorded using an accelerating voltage
of 10 kV. For pore size quantifications, images were recorded from
four random locations of perpendicular samples. The lengths of the
shortest axis of 50 pores were measured using ImageJ.[14]
Cell Culture
To
evaluate the effect
of micromorphologies on the differentiation of C2C12murine skeletal
muscle myoblasts, unidirectional collagen scaffolds with frayedlike
(prepared using 0.25 M oxalic acid) and smooth (prepared using 0.25
M malonic acid) micromorphologies were selected.Scaffolds were
prepared as above and processed as described.[16] Briefly, scaffolds were strengthened by vapor fixation with 37%
formaldehyde (Scharlau) under vacuum for 30 min and processed into
their final dimensions (diameter, 12 mm; height, 4 mm; top and bottom
were removed) and remaining aldehydes were quenched by incubation
in 1 M sodium phosphate buffer (pH 6.5, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany)
containing 30 mM NaBH4 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) for
1 h at 4 °C. Scaffolds were cross-linked using 33 mM N-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-carbodiimide (Fluka Chemica
AG, Buchs, Switzerland) and 6 mM N-hydroxysuccinimide
(Fluka Chemica AG) in 50 mM 2-morpholinoethane sulfonic acid (MES
buffer, pH 5.0; Sigma-Aldrich) containing 40% (v/v) ethanol for 4
h. Subsequently, scaffolds were washed with 0.1 M Na2HPO4 (Merck), 1 M NaCl (Merck), 2 M NaCl, demineralized water,
and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4) and sterilized while wet
with 25 kGy γ-irradiation.[16]Cell culture experiments were performed, n = 4,
with each condition in triplicate. C2C12murine skeletal muscle myoblasts
were expanded in a monolayer until 90% confluency using proliferation
medium: Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM; Gibco,
Carlsbad, CA), supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS, Pan-Biotech,
Aidenbach, Germany), 100 IU/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin
(Amresco, Solon, OH). C2C12 cells were trypsinized using 0.05% trypsin–ethylenediamine
tetraacetic acid (EDTA, Corning, Manassas, VA), followed by seeding
of 2.5 × 106 cells per scaffold. In short, 100 μL
of cell suspension (25 × 106 cells/mL) was dripped
on the scaffolds while the scaffolds were placed on an autoclaved
Whatman chromatography paper (3030-917, GE Healthcare Life Sciences,
Pittsburg, PA) to allow the cell suspension to infiltrate the scaffold
by capillary force. Scaffolds were then incubated at 37 °C for
3 h to let the cells adhere to the scaffolds, after which scaffolds
were transferred to new 12-well plates and proliferation medium was
added. The scaffolds were cultured for 7 days in proliferation medium
and subsequently for 7 days in differentiation medium (DMEM), supplemented
with 1% horse serum (PAA Laboratories, Cölbe, Germany), 100
IU/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin. Cells cultured
in the monolayer (5000 cells/well in 12-well plate) were used as a
reference for quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysis.
The medium was changed every 3 days. Scaffolds were harvested after
14 days and cut into half for histological qPCR analysis.
Histology and Immunohistochemistry
For histological
evaluation, samples were washed in 0.1 M PBS, pH
7.4, fixed in 4% formaldehyde in 0.1 M PBS, pH 7.4, dehydrated through
graded ethanol series, cleared in xylene, embedded in paraffin, and
cut into 5 μm thick sections. Sections were stained with hematoxylin
and eosin (H&E) or toluidine blue (2.5% in 5% Borax solution)
and by immunofluorescence using an antibody against myosin.[17] Briefly, sections were incubated in 0.1 M citrate
buffer for 60 min, blocked by 0.15% glycine in 0.1 M PBS, pH 7.4,
for 30 min, and in 1% (w/v) bovineserum albumin (BSA), 5% (v/v) normal
goat serum, 0.1% (w/v) cold water fish gelatin (Sigma-Aldrich), and
0.1% (v/v) Triton X-100 in 0.1 M PBS, pH 7.4, for another 30 min.
Sections were incubated with a primary antibody against myosin (1:400,
MY-32, Sigma-Aldrich) for 60 min, followed by a secondary antibody
goat antimouse IgG (H + L) Alexa 488 for 60 min and 10 μg/mL
4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Roche Diagnostics GmbH,
Mannheim, Germany) to stain nuclei. Control sections were incubated
with the secondary antibody only. After each step, sections were washed
with PBS. Sections were enclosed in Mowiol mounting medium (Sigma-Aldrich).
Quantitative PCR Analysis
Isolation
of RNA, evaluation of RNA quality, synthesis of cDNA, and qPCR analysis
were performed as described.[16] Briefly,
RNA was isolated in TRIzol (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA) using
the RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen GmbH, Hilden, Germany, 74106), followed
by measuring RNA quality using a NanoDrop instrument (Thermo Scientific,
Rockford, IL). An iScript cDNA synthesis kit (Bio-Rad Laboratories,
Inc., Hercules, CA) was used to convert 500 ng of RNA into cDNA, using
a T100 Thermal Cycler (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.) for 5 min at 25
°C, 30 min at 42 °C, and 5 min at 85 °C. Milli-Q water
was included as no template control (NTC). Obtained cDNA (20 μL)
was diluted 20 times in Milli-Q water. Gene expressions were measured
using SYBR Green qPCR, by iQ SYBR Green Supermix (Bio-Rad Laboratories,
Inc.), and 2 μL of cDNA as a template, including NTC and Milli-Q
water controls. The following primer sequences were used in real-time
PCR analyses: glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) forward
5′-TGATGGGTGTGAACCACGAG-3′; reverse 5′-GGGCCATCCACAGTCTTCTG-3′;
actinin forward 5′-TCATCCTCCGCTTCGCCATTC-3′; reverse
5′-CTTCAGCATCCAACATCTT-3′; and myosin heavy chain (pMHC)
forward 5′-TCGCTGGGCTGGGTGTTAG-3′; reverse 5′-TGTCTGTCAGGCTGGGTGTG-3′.
qPCR was performed on a CFX96 real-time system (Bio-Rad). The following
amplification settings were used: 5 min at 95 °C, followed by
45 cycles of 10 s at 95 °C, 20 s at 60 °C, and 20 s at 72
°C. Crossing-point (Cp) values, expressed as quantification cycle
(Cq), were obtained using Bio-Rad CFX Manager 3.1 software (Bio-Rad).[16] Gene expressions were normalized to GAPDH and
expressed as 2–ΔCq.
Statistics
Results of pore size measurements
and qPCR are shown as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical
differences were assessed using GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software,
Inc., version 5, La Jolla, CA) by unpaired t-tests
and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s
posthoc tests to compare different groups, where p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
Scaffold Characterization
Collagen Scaffolds Constructed with Dicarboxylic
Acids
The construction of collagen scaffolds using various
dicarboxylic acids resulted in striking different micromorphologies
of the pore wall (Figure , unidirectional scaffolds). Morphology depended on whether
acids were used with an even or odd (uneven) number of C-atoms. Oxalic
acid (C2) and succinic acid (C4) showed morphologically open interconnective
frayedlike wall structures, while the morphology in scaffolds constructed
from malonic acid (C3) and glutaric acid (C5) showed smooth wall surfaces.
Differences in frayedlike wall structures were observed: scaffolds
prepared using oxalic acid displayed a honeycomb-like structure, whereas
succinic acid resulted in a fibrillar micromorphology. Wall thickness
also varied among the acids applied: oxalic acid and succinic acid
resulted in thick walls, whereas the use of malonic acid and glutaric
acid resulted in thinner walls.
Figure 1
Morphology of scaffolds prepared using
dicarboxylic acids. (A)
Scanning electron micrographs of unidirectional scaffolds using different
dicarboxylic acids (all 0.25 M) showing major variations in micromorphologies
depending on the type of acid. The use of oxalic acid (C2) and succinic
acid (C4) resulted in an open, frayedlike morphology, while malonic
acid (C3) and glutaric acid (C5) resulted in smooth-walled structures.
Specific frayedlike micromorphologies were observed: a honeycomb-like
structure in walls from scaffolds prepared using oxalic acid, and
a fibrillar structure using succinic acid. (B) Light microscopy images
(toluidine blue staining) of unidirectional scaffolds prepared using
oxalic acid or malonic acid. Note a frayed, open wall structure using
oxalic acid, and a smooth, closed wall structure using malonic acid.
(C) Scanning electron micrographs of longitudinal cross sections of
unidirectional collagen scaffolds prepared using 0.05 and 1 M oxalic
acid indicating that the pore morphology depends on the applied concentration,
where a higher acid concentration increased wall thickness and frayed
structure. Scale bars represent 50 μm.
Morphology of scaffolds prepared using
dicarboxylic acids. (A)
Scanning electron micrographs of unidirectional scaffolds using different
dicarboxylic acids (all 0.25 M) showing major variations in micromorphologies
depending on the type of acid. The use of oxalic acid (C2) and succinic
acid (C4) resulted in an open, frayedlike morphology, while malonic
acid (C3) and glutaric acid (C5) resulted in smooth-walled structures.
Specific frayedlike micromorphologies were observed: a honeycomb-like
structure in walls from scaffolds prepared using oxalic acid, and
a fibrillar structure using succinic acid. (B) Light microscopy images
(toluidine blue staining) of unidirectional scaffolds prepared using
oxalic acid or malonic acid. Note a frayed, open wall structure using
oxalic acid, and a smooth, closed wall structure using malonic acid.
(C) Scanning electron micrographs of longitudinal cross sections of
unidirectional collagen scaffolds prepared using 0.05 and 1 M oxalic
acid indicating that the pore morphology depends on the applied concentration,
where a higher acid concentration increased wall thickness and frayed
structure. Scale bars represent 50 μm.For collagen scaffolds with an overall random pore structure, a
similar phenomenon was observed: a frayed, open wall structure when
even-numbered acids (oxalic acid/succinic acid) were used (0.25 M),
and a smooth, closed wall structure in the case of odd-numbered acids
(malonic acid/glutaric acid; 0.25 M) (Figure ). Morphologies were concentration-dependant.
At very low concentrations (0.05 M), all acids resulted in a smooth
appearance of the wall, whereas at high concentrations (2 M), the
odd-numbered acids (malonic and glutaric acid) also resulted in frayed,
open wall structures.
Figure 2
Effect of type and concentration of dicarboxylic acid
on the formation
of micromorphologies in collagen scaffolds. Scanning electron micrographs
of random pore scaffolds showing that scaffolds prepared using 0.05
M dicarboxylic acid have smooth wall structures. Pore wall structures
are more frayed upon an increase in acid concentration. For dicarboxylic
acids with an even number of C-atoms (oxalic acid and succinic acid),
the pore structures are frayed at 0.25 M, while for odd acids (malonic
acid and glutaric acid), these structures were observed at 1 M, being
more apparent at 2 M. Scale bars represent 100 μm.
Effect of type and concentration of dicarboxylic acid
on the formation
of micromorphologies in collagen scaffolds. Scanning electron micrographs
of random pore scaffolds showing that scaffolds prepared using 0.05
M dicarboxylic acid have smooth wall structures. Pore wall structures
are more frayed upon an increase in acid concentration. For dicarboxylic
acids with an even number of C-atoms (oxalic acid and succinic acid),
the pore structures are frayed at 0.25 M, while for odd acids (malonic
acid and glutaric acid), these structures were observed at 1 M, being
more apparent at 2 M. Scale bars represent 100 μm.An increase in acid concentration generally resulted in more
frayed
open wall structures (Figure ). For dicarboxylic acids with an even number of C-atoms,
the pore structure became more frayed from 0.25 M acid onwards. For
dicarboxylic acids with an odd number of C-atoms, frayed structures
appeared when using 1 M acid, which became more apparent at concentrations
of 2 M. These results indicate that the formation of smooth or frayed
structures depends on the type as well as the concentration of the
dicarboxylic acid (also see Section ). An increase in acid concentration
from 0.05 to 2 M reduced the pore size in scaffolds. For instance,
in the case of oxalic acid, the pore size decreased from 143 ±
41 μm at 0.05 M to 89 ± 26 μm at 0.25 M (p < 0.0001); for glutaric acid, this was 132 ± 43
μm at 0.05 M to 36 ± 10 μm at 2.0 M (p < 0.0001).Whereas there was a clear effect of the acids
on the micromorphology
of the wall structure of the individual pores, there was no effect
on the overall structure of the scaffolds: the unidirectionality (Figure ) or random pore
structure (Figure ) of scaffolds was not affected.
Collagen
Scaffolds Constructed with Monocarboxylic
Acids
No morphological differences in the pore wall structure
and wall thickness were found between scaffolds prepared using the
monocarboxylic acids, such as formic acid, acetic acid, and propionic
acid (Figure (unidirectional
scaffolds); 0.25 M acid concentration: for SEM of random pore scaffolds,
see refs (15, 18, 19) and (19)).
Figure 3
Unidirectional
scaffolds prepared using monocarboxylic acids. Scanning
electron micrographs of unidirectional collagen scaffolds prepared
using different monocarboxylic acids (all 0.25 M) showing no variations
in micromorphologies. Scale bars represent 50 μm.
Unidirectional
scaffolds prepared using monocarboxylic acids. Scanning
electron micrographs of unidirectional collagen scaffolds prepared
using different monocarboxylic acids (all 0.25 M) showing no variations
in micromorphologies. Scale bars represent 50 μm.
Effect of Unsaturated Dicarboxylic Acids
with the Same Number of Carbon Atoms
To investigate the effect
of acid solubility further, independently of the carbon chain length,
random collagen scaffolds were constructed using the unsaturated C4dicarboxylic acids, namely, maleic acid (well-dissolvable cis) and
fumaric acid (poorly dissolvable trans). For maleic acid, smooth pore
walls were visible, while a more threadlike morphology was observed
for fumaric acid (Figure ).
Figure 4
Effect of acid solubility on the formation of micromorphologies.
Scanning electron micrographs of the pore structure of scaffolds prepared
from cis/trans isomers (both C4), maleic acid (A, cis) and fumaric
acid (B, trans), showed smooth and a more threadlike pore structure
for maleic acid and fumaric acid, respectively. Scale bars represent
100 μm.
Effect of acid solubility on the formation of micromorphologies.
Scanning electron micrographs of the pore structure of scaffolds prepared
from cis/trans isomers (both C4), maleic acid (A, cis) and fumaric
acid (B, trans), showed smooth and a more threadlike pore structure
for maleic acid and fumaric acid, respectively. Scale bars represent
100 μm.
Cytocompatibility
and Cellular Differentiation
General Morphology and
Immunocytochemistry
To evaluate the cytocompatibility of
the scaffolds and to investigate
the effect of incorporated micromorphologies on cell differentiation,
C2C12 cells were cultured on unidirectional collagen scaffolds prepared
using 0.25 M oxalic acid (frayedlike morphology) and 0.25 M malonic
acid (smooth morphology) for 14 days. C2C12 cells infiltrated deeply
into the scaffolds, which was facilitated by the unidirectional pore
architecture. Using malonic acid, cells infiltrated deeper into the
scaffolds compared to scaffolds prepared using oxalic acid (Figure A). Myosin staining
(Figure B) was more
intense for C2C12 cells cultured in scaffolds prepared using oxalic
acid (frayed morphology).
Figure 5
Differentiation of C2C12 cells seeded on scaffolds
prepared using
oxalic acid and malonic acid. (A) Unidirectional pore architecture
facilitated infiltration of cells, but cells were found deeper in
scaffolds prepared using malonic acid compared to those using oxalic
acid (arrows represent the depth in the scaffold where cells were
found). Scale bars represent 200 μm (top panel) and 100 μm
(bottom panel). (B) More intense myosin staining for C2C12 cells cultured
in scaffolds prepared from oxalic acid compared to those using malonic
acid. Staining was more intense for oxalic acid. Scale bars represent
50 μm. (C) Analysis of gene expression levels of actinin (p = 0.081), myogenin (p = 0.064), and pMHC
indicated that pMHC gene expression levels were significantly increased
(p = 0.013) for C2C12 cells cultured on scaffolds
prepared using oxalic acid (frayed morphology) compared to those using
malonic acid (smooth morphology). A general trend was seen for higher
gene expression levels in C2C12 cells cultured on frayed morphologies
compared to that on smooth morphologies.
Differentiation of C2C12 cells seeded on scaffolds
prepared using
oxalic acid and malonic acid. (A) Unidirectional pore architecture
facilitated infiltration of cells, but cells were found deeper in
scaffolds prepared using malonic acid compared to those using oxalic
acid (arrows represent the depth in the scaffold where cells were
found). Scale bars represent 200 μm (top panel) and 100 μm
(bottom panel). (B) More intense myosin staining for C2C12 cells cultured
in scaffolds prepared from oxalic acid compared to those using malonic
acid. Staining was more intense for oxalic acid. Scale bars represent
50 μm. (C) Analysis of gene expression levels of actinin (p = 0.081), myogenin (p = 0.064), and pMHC
indicated that pMHC gene expression levels were significantly increased
(p = 0.013) for C2C12 cells cultured on scaffolds
prepared using oxalic acid (frayed morphology) compared to those using
malonic acid (smooth morphology). A general trend was seen for higher
gene expression levels in C2C12 cells cultured on frayed morphologies
compared to that on smooth morphologies.
mRNA Analysis
Gene expressions
of actinin, myogenin, and perinatal myosin heavy chain (pMHC) were
analyzed in C2C12 cells and compared to the expression of the C2C12
cells cultured in the monolayer as a positive control. mRNA analysis
indicated that pMHC gene expression was significantly upregulated
for C2C12 cells cultured on scaffolds prepared using oxalic acid (frayed
morphology) compared to those using malonic acid (smooth morphology).
No differences were observed for actinin (p = 0.081)
and myogenin (p = 0.064) gene expression levels between
scaffolds prepared using oxalic acid and malonic acid and positive
controls (Figure C).
A general trend of higher gene expression levels of C2C12 cells was
found when cultured on frayed morphologies compared to that on smooth
morphologies.
Discussion
In vitro
studies have investigated the effect of micromorphologies
using two-dimensional (2D) monolayer culture models, where substrates
have been modified with a number of topographical features, including
ridges, pillars, pits, and grooves, applied in various patterns.[11−13] These studies have been highly informative with regard to the 2D
effect of specific micromorphologies on cellular behavior. The application
of biological 3D patterned substrates like collagen scaffolds, however,
has been limited. We here put forward a technology to incorporate
specific 3D micromorphologies into individual walls of collagen scaffolds
to study cellular behavior in a 3D setting. The technology is based
on the use of specific dicarboxylic acids in the preparation of scaffolds.In general, the overall pore structure of a scaffold is a reflection
of the size and form of ice crystals formed during the freezing process.
Upon lyophilization, the ice is sublimated, leaving behind a pore
structure resembling the dimensions of the original ice crystal. In
such a way, overall random and unidirectional pore structures can
be introduced.[14,15,20,21] In this study, we showed that the application
of dicarboxylic acids adds the second level of morphology to the scaffolds,
conferring a specific microstructure to the walls of individual pores.
It was observed that α,ω-alkanedicarboxylic acids with
an even number of C-atoms led to open, frayed/fibrillar wall structures,
whereas dicarboxylic acids with an odd number of C-atoms led to scaffolds
with a solid, smooth wall structure.It is known that series
of alkane derivatives often show alternating
physicochemical characteristics between compounds with an even and
odd number of carbon atoms, e.g., with respect to solubility.[22] This odd–even effect is generally explained
by a packing effect based on the shape of even- and odd-numbered alkanes
resembling a parallelogram and a trapezoid, respectively,[23,24] see Figure . Even-numbered
compounds have their terminal groups on opposite sides of the zig-zagcarbon chain, whereas in uneven-numbered compounds, the groups are
on the same side. This makes uneven-numbered molecules relatively
unsymmetric, fitting poorly into a crystal lattice. Therefore, the
even-numbered ones fit better into a crystal lattice than the uneven-numbered
ones. Dicarboxylic acids represent a specific group within the odd–even
compounds. The formation of hydrogen-bonded dimers at both ends of
the molecules (carboxyl dimer synthons) likely plays a role in this.
Odd–even dicarboxylic acids differ in their capacity to form
crystals. Thalladi et al.[22] proposed a
parallelogram–trapezoid model that explains the lower packing
stability of odd acids by the repulsive effect of carboxy dimers of
adjacent chains. In even acids, the distance between the carboxy dimers
can be increased by slightly shifting each chain along the chain axis
(lateral offset), thus decreasing repulsion. In odd acids, shifting
the chain would increase the distance on one side of each molecule
but decreases the distance on the other side, resulting in an increase
in repulsion. The crystal packing of odd dicarboxylic acids therefore
cannot be stabilized in this way, resulting in twisting of carboxy
groups and severe torsion into molecules.[22] Although this model is not directly translatable to the lower dicarboxylic
acids (dicarboxylic acids, Michra et al. confirmed the odd–even
concept of Thalladi et al., including the C3 malonic acid and C4 succinic
acid.[25] It is however plausible that the
influence of the hydrophobic effect on crystallization is less in
the case of lower dicarboxylic acids.
Figure 6
Relation between the number of C-atoms
and dicarboxylic acid solubility
and the crystal packing of even and odd acids. (A) Solubility of dicarboxylic
acids in water. There is an even-odd effect with respect to the number
of C-atoms on solubility. Differences in solubility are also present
between fumaric acid and maleic acid (both 4 C-atoms), having low
and high solubility, respectively. For poorly soluble acids, readily
forming crystals and open, frayed/fibrillar structures within individual
pore walls were observed in collagen scaffolds, whereas for highly
soluble acids, smooth wall structures were found. (B) Overall structure
of acids with an even and odd number of C-atoms (parallelogram versus
trapezoid-like). The difficulty to form crystals in the case of trapezoid-shaped
acids results in smooth pore walls, while the ease of crystallization
of parallelogram-shaped acids results in frayed pore walls.
Relation between the number of C-atoms
and dicarboxylic acid solubility
and the crystal packing of even and odd acids. (A) Solubility of dicarboxylic
acids in water. There is an even-odd effect with respect to the number
of C-atoms on solubility. Differences in solubility are also present
between fumaric acid and maleic acid (both 4 C-atoms), having low
and high solubility, respectively. For poorly soluble acids, readily
forming crystals and open, frayed/fibrillar structures within individual
pore walls were observed in collagen scaffolds, whereas for highly
soluble acids, smooth wall structures were found. (B) Overall structure
of acids with an even and odd number of C-atoms (parallelogram versus
trapezoid-like). The difficulty to form crystals in the case of trapezoid-shaped
acids results in smooth pore walls, while the ease of crystallization
of parallelogram-shaped acids results in frayed pore walls.Taking into account the odd–even theory,
the striking differences
in the intrawall morphology observed for scaffolds prepared with various
dicarboxylic acids may now be explained. During freezing of the scaffolds,
the even dicarboxylic acids will crystallize and the crystals will
be removed by lyophilization, leaving behind a micromorphology specific
for the type of acid (compare the honeycomb structures for oxalic
acid and the fibrillar structure for succinic acid, Figure ). Odd-numbered acids will
crystallize only at a very high (≥1 M) concentration. Thus,
the ease or difficulty to form crystals from even (parallelogram)
or odd (trapezoid) acids, respectively, give rise to the formation
of micromorphologies observed in this study. The monocarboxylic acids
tested (formic acid, acetic acid, and propionic acid) do not form
specific microstructures, likely due to their high solubility in water,
not readily forming crystals. Clearly, the solubility of the acid
in water and the type of micromorphology are correlated. This was
also observed for scaffolds constructed using the unsaturated dicarboxylic
acids, maleic acid (cis isomer) and fumaric acid (trans isomer), both
containing four carbon atoms. For the poorly soluble fumaric acid,
a threadlike micromorphology was observed, whereas for the well-soluble
maleic acid, a smooth morphology was noticed. The difference is solubility
can be explained by the cis-conformation of maleic acids that enables
the formation of intramolecular hydrogen bonds between the two carboxylic
acid groups.[26] This results in a strongly
increased solubility (6.16 mol/kg at 298.15 K[27]) for maleic acid compared to that for fumaric acid (0.05–0.06
mol/kg).[28]In vitro analysis was
performed to investigate the cytocompatibility
and the effect of different micromorphologies on cellular differentiation.
C2C12 cells were cultured on unidirectional type I collagen scaffolds
since these scaffolds facilitate cell infiltration due to the aligned
pore architecture.[14] In scaffolds with
an open, frayedlike micromorphology, differentiation was favored in
comparison to scaffolds with a smooth micromorphology, as indicated
by increased myosin staining and pMHC gene expression level. This
observation is in line with the preference of cells for irregular
structures[8−10] and may be explained by focal adhesion formation
and subsequent signal transduction cascades. Yang et al.[29] described that micromorphologies play important
roles in the formation and dissociation of focal adhesions. Adaptation
of focal adhesions due to the provided scaffold template, as a result
of mechanotransduction, may result in physical changes and reorganization
of intracellular compartments.[30,31] Subsequently, this
may result in differences in protein expression, interaction and concentration,
and intracellular signaling, including that of focal adhesion kinase.[32,33] The observation that cells in scaffolds with a smooth wall structure
penetrate deeper into the scaffolds may be related to a lesser degree
of interaction between cells and the substrate in comparison to frayed,
rough wall structures.In conclusion, this study shows that
the specific intrawall micromorphology
can be introduced to collagen scaffolds by the use of dicarboxylic
acids. The micromorphologies correlate with the length of the carbon
skeleton of the dicarboxylic acid and can be explained by the even/odd
effect. Micromorphologies are adaptable by the type and concentration
of the acids used and influence cell behavior.
Authors: Marc Hulsman; Frits Hulshof; Hemant Unadkat; Bernke J Papenburg; Dimitrios F Stamatialis; Roman Truckenmüller; Clemens van Blitterswijk; Jan de Boer; Marcel J T Reinders Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Michiel W Pot; Kaeuis A Faraj; Alaa Adawy; Willem J P van Enckevort; Herman T B van Moerkerk; Elias Vlieg; Willeke F Daamen; Toin H van Kuppevelt Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 9.229
Authors: Benjamin Kim Kiat Teo; Sum Thai Wong; Choon Kiat Lim; Terrence Y S Kung; Chong Hao Yap; Yamini Ramagopal; Lewis H Romer; Evelyn K F Yim Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Ludmila L Semenycheva; Marfa N Egorikhina; Victoria O Chasova; Natalya B Valetova; Yulia L Kuznetsova; Alexander V Mitin Journal: Mar Drugs Date: 2020-04-11 Impact factor: 5.118