| Literature DB >> 33869902 |
Weimin Guo1,2, Mingxue Chen2,3, Zhenyong Wang2, Yue Tian2, Jinxuan Zheng4, Shuang Gao5, Yangyang Li5, Yufeng Zheng6, Xu Li2,7, Jingxiang Huang2, Wei Niu2, Shuangpeng Jiang2, Chunxiang Hao8, Zhiguo Yuan2, Yu Zhang2, Mingjie Wang2, Zehao Wang2, Jiang Peng2, Aiyuan Wang2, Yu Wang2, Xiang Sui2, Wenjing Xu2, Libo Hao2, Xifu Zheng9, Shuyun Liu2, Quanyi Guo2.
Abstract
Despite intensive effort was made to regenerate injured meniscus by cell-free strategies through recruiting endogenous stem/progenitor cells, meniscus regeneration remains a great challenge in clinic. In this study, we found decellularized meniscal extracellular matrix (MECM) preserved native meniscal collagen and glycosaminoglycans which could be a good endogenous regeneration guider for stem cells. Moreover, MECM significantly promoted meniscal fibrochondrocytes viability and proliferation, increased the expression of type II collagen and proteoglycans in vitro. Meanwhile, we designed 3D-printed polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds which mimic the circumferential and radial collagen orientation in native meniscus. Taken these two advantages together, a micro-structure and micro-environment dually biomimetic cell-free scaffold was manipulated. This cell-free PCL-MECM scaffold displayed superior biocompatibility and yielded favorable biomechanical capacities closely to native meniscus. Strikingly, neo-menisci were regenerated within PCL-MECM scaffolds which were transplanted into knee joints underwent medial meniscectomy in rabbits and sheep models. Histological staining confirmed neo-menisci showed meniscus-like heterogeneous staining. Mankin scores showed PCL-MECM scaffold could protect articular cartilage well, and knee X-ray examination revealed same results. Knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning also showed some neo-menisci in PCL-MECM scaffold group. In conclusion, PCL-MECM scaffold appears to optimize meniscus regeneration. This could represent a promising approach worthy of further investigation in preclinical applications.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; Biomimetic scaffold; Cell-free; Decellularization; Meniscus regeneration
Year: 2021 PMID: 33869902 PMCID: PMC8039774 DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.02.019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioact Mater ISSN: 2452-199X
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of the whole study.
Fig. 2a) A schematic diagram showed the preparation of MECM using differential centrifugation approach. b), c), d), e) Comparison of the native meniscus and MECM. f) Topography of the various coated surfaces. g) Cellular appearance of meniscal fibrochondrocytes on various coated surfaces. h), i) Safranin O and toluidine blue staining of meniscal fibrochondrocytes after 7 and 14 days on various coated surfaces. All experiments were independently repeated in triplicate. Error bars represent standard deviation (*P < 0.05).
Primer sequences of target genes used for RT-PCR.
| Target genes Primer sequences Direction GenBank accession number |
|---|
| Rbt Gapdh 5′-CAAGAAGGTGGTGAAGCAGG-3′ Forward |
| 5′-CACTGTTGAAGTCGCAGGAG-3′ Reverse |
| Rbt Col1a2 5′-GCCACCTGCCAGTCTTTACA-3′ Forward |
| 5′-CCATCATCACCATCTCTGCCT-3′ Reverse |
| Rbt Col2a1 5′-CACGCTCAAGTCCCTCAACA-3′ Forward |
| 5′-TCTATCCAGTAGTCACCGCTCT-3′ Reverse |
| Rbt Sox-9 5′-GCGGAGGAAGTCGGTGAAGAAT-3′ Forward |
| 5′-AAGATGGCGTTGGGCGAGAT-3′ Reverse |
| Rbt Col10a1 5′-CCACCAGGACAAGCAGTCAT-3′ Forward |
| 5′-CACTAACAAGAGGCATCCCG-3′ Reverse |
| Rbt Aggrecan 5′-GGAGGAGCAGGAGTTTGTCAA-3′ Forward |
| 5′-TGTCCATCCGACCAGCGAAA-3′ Reverse |
Rabbits and sheep used for each group.
| PCL-MECM scaffold group | Autograft group | Sham group | Control group | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rabbits | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Sheep | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
Fig. 3a), b) SEM assessment of PCL and PCL-MECM scaffolds in the cross-sectional view and vertical section views. c), d) Biomechanical assessment of the various scaffolds. e) SEM assessment of meniscal fibrochondrocytes after 3 days on various PCL-MECM scaffolds. f), g) Confocal microscopy image and cell viability rate of the meniscal fibrochondrocytes after 7 and 14 days on various PCL-MECM scaffolds. h), i), j) DNA content and ECM production of meniscal fibrochondrocytes after 7 and 14 days on various PCL-MECM scaffolds. k). HE, safranin O, and toluidine blue staining of the rat GFP meniscal fibrochondrocytes and PCL-MECM scaffolds constructs in nude rats 4 weeks after subcutaneous implantation. All experiments were independently repeated in triplicate. Error bars represent standard deviation (*P < 0.05).
Comparison of the various cell-free PCL-MECM scaffolds.
| LA group | LU group | SA group | SU group | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tensile modulus | + | – | + | – |
| Compressive modulus | + | + | – | – |
| Cell viability | + | – | – | – |
| Chondrogenic differentiation in vitro | + | + | – | – |
| Chondrogenic differentiation in vivo | + | + | + | + |
+ good, - normal.
Fig. 4Comprehensive assessment of the neo-menisci in a rabbit meniscus injury repair model 3 months post-surgery. a) Macroscopic analysis of neo-menisci and articular cartilage of the corresponding tibial plateau and femoral condyles. b) Histological staining of the neo-menisci (Black arrows indicate degraded PCL). c) Tibial plateau coverage rate of neo-menisci. d) Histological scores of the neo-menisci. e), f), g) h) Histological staining and scores of articular cartilage in the corresponding tibial plateau and femoral condyles, respectively. i), j) X-ray assessment and scores of the corresponding knee joints. All experiments were independently repeated in triplicate. Error bars represent standard deviation (*P < 0.05).
Fig. 5Comprehensive assessment of the neo-menisci in a rabbit meniscus injury repair model 6 months post-surgery. a) Macroscopic analysis of neo-menisci and articular cartilage of the corresponding tibial plateau and femoral condyles. b) Histological staining of the neo-menisci (Black arrows indicate degraded PCL). c) Tibial plateau coverage rate of neo-menisci. d) Histological scores of the neo-menisci. e), f), g) h) Histological staining and scores of articular cartilage in the corresponding tibial plateau and femoral condyles, respectively. i), j) X-ray assessment and scores of the corresponding knee joints. All experiments were independently repeated in triplicate. Error bars represent standard deviation (*P < 0.05).
Fig. 6Schematic illustration of the degradation process of the PCL-MECM scaffold and the regeneration process of neo-meniscus.