| Literature DB >> 34768972 |
Maradhana Agung Marsudi1, Ridhola Tri Ariski1, Arie Wibowo1,2, Glen Cooper3, Anggraini Barlian4, Riska Rachmantyo1, Paulo J D S Bartolo3.
Abstract
The practice of combining external stimulation therapy alongside stimuli-responsive bio-scaffolds has shown massive potential for tissue engineering applications. One promising example is the combination of electrical stimulation (ES) and electroactive scaffolds because ES could enhance cell adhesion and proliferation as well as modulating cellular specialization. Even though electroactive scaffolds have the potential to revolutionize the field of tissue engineering due to their ability to distribute ES directly to the target tissues, the development of effective electroactive scaffolds with specific properties remains a major issue in their practical uses. Conductive polymers (CPs) offer ease of modification that allows for tailoring the scaffold's various properties, making them an attractive option for conductive component in electroactive scaffolds. This review provides an up-to-date narrative of the progress of CPs-based electroactive scaffolds and the challenge of their use in various tissue engineering applications from biomaterials perspectives. The general issues with CP-based scaffolds relevant to its application as electroactive scaffolds were discussed, followed by a more specific discussion in their applications for specific tissues, including bone, nerve, skin, skeletal muscle and cardiac muscle scaffolds. Furthermore, this review also highlighted the importance of the manufacturing process relative to the scaffold's performance, with particular emphasis on additive manufacturing, and various strategies to overcome the CPs' limitations in the development of electroactive scaffolds.Entities:
Keywords: additive manufacturing; bone; cardiac; conductive polymers; electroactive scaffold; muscle; nerve; skin; tissue engineering
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34768972 PMCID: PMC8584045 DOI: 10.3390/ijms222111543
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Illustration about advantages of conductive polymeric (CP)-based electroactive scaffold and their electrical stimulation for various tissue engineering applications.
Figure 2General issues with CP-based scaffolds and its potential improvement strategies.
Figure 3Effect of incorporating PANI into PCL nanofibrous scaffold to its mechanical properties. (a) Stress-strain curve, (b) Tensile strength, (c) Elongation at break, and (d) Young’s modulus. * Significantly different from pure PCL (p < 0.05, n = 5); ** Significantly different from PCL-PANI-1 (p < 0.05, n = 5). Reproduced with permission from [51]. Copyright (2013) Elsevier.
Figure 4Relationship between surface roughness and hydrophilicity. (i.) AFM images and surface roughness value (Ra) of the scaffolds, and (ii.) Contact angle of each scaffold. Each alphabet corresponds to different samples, namely: (a) PLA, (b) PANI/PLA-HCl, (c) PANI/PLA-H2SO4, and (d) PANI/PLA-HClO4. Adapted with permission from [92]. Copyright (2021) Springer.
Figure 5(a) Synthesis route of PEGMA-PLA-GMA-AT biodegradable conductive polymer. (b) Biodegradability of the copolymer with various ratio of PLA:aniline tetramer. Adapted with permission from [94]. Copyright (2016) Royal Society of Chemistry.
Figure 6The human body and its electrical activity. Reproduced with permission from [97]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier.
Non-exhaustive summary of CP-based scaffolds in various tissue engineering applications.
| Tissue Type | Specific Requirements | Biomaterial (matrix/CPs) | Strategy | Optimum Result | Ref. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical Properties (MPa) | Conductivity (S/cm) | Concentration (%) | Mechanical Properties (MPa) | Conductivity (S/cm) | Cell Viability/Proliferation | ||||||
| Pristine | Composite | Pristine | Composite | ||||||||
| Bone | Cortical [ Young’s modulus ( Compressive strength ( Tensile strength ( | Cortical: 5.8–6.3 × 10−4 [ | PCL/PANI | Incorporation PANI as a filler through melt blending method and suitable for scaffold manufacturing through 3D printing | 0.1% of PANI | 1.1 × 10 −11 | 2.46 ± 0.85 × 10−4 | Enhanced cell proliferation and cell viability from 75% to 88% | [ | ||
| Collagen/ | Incorporation as PPy a filler through an electrospun nanofiber scaffold | 10% of PPy | 0.80 × 10−3 | 1.5 × 10−3 | Enhanced cell proliferation and viability from 290% to 310% | [ | |||||
| PLLA/PPy | Incorporation PPy as a filler with different morphology of PPy | 15% of Tubular PPy | N/A | ~7.0 × 10−4 | Showed low cytotoxicity with cell viability around 80% | [ | |||||
| PU-PANI/PVA/PDA | PVA incorporated into a PU-PANI/PDA scaffold through the electrospinning method | 2% of PANI | 0.9 × 10−3 | 0.7 × 10−3 | Showed great ability in the biomineralization of | [ | |||||
| Chitosan–gelatin–agar-PEDOT:PSS | Organic solvent (DMSO) added to the CPs solution during the synthesis process | Adding 3.0 vol.% DMSO | N/A | N/A | 1.71 ± 0.01 × 10−5 | 3.75 × 10−1 | DMSO is considered as non-toxic solvent at a concentration below 10% ( | [ | |||
| Brain: | ~3 × 10−4 to 6 × 10−2 [ | SF/PEDOT:PSS | Organic solvent (DMSO) added to CPs and doped to SF | 5.0 vol.% of DMSO in 3 mg/mL PEDOT:PSS | N/A | N/A | ~10−6 | ~0.4 | Enhanced metabolic activity, cell proliferation, and neuron differentiation | [ | |
| SF/PPy | Incorporation as a coating with aligned diameter variation | Diameters and distances of coating are 180/700 (μm) | N/A | N/A | 1 × 10−11 | 1.13 × 10−3 | Showed good compatibility with L929 cells and may enhance Schwann cell adhesion, differentiation, and proliferation | [ | |||
| PCL/PPy | Fabricating porous 3D scaffold from block copolymer PPy and PCL through a novel electrohydrodynamic 3D jet printing method | 1% of PPy | 0.9 × 10−7 | 1.02 × 10−3 | Promotes differentiation and maturation of hESC-20 NCSCs to peripheral neurons | [ | |||||
| CS/PANI | PANI blended with CS to produce a conductive scaffold in the form of cell-imprinted hydrogel | N/A (0 | 7.5 × 10−8 | 1.3 × 10−4 | Showed biocompatibility and supportingrole of flat and cell-imprinted CS-PANI substrates for adhesion and growth of ADSCs | [ | |||||
| Skin | 1 × 10−7 to 2.6 × 10−3 [ | SF/PPy and SF/PANI | CPs as coated material by in situ polymerization | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1 × 10−11 | 2.2 × 10−5 | Cells adhered better to the PANI-coated surface. Good cytocompatibility was also shown by PPY/SF and PANI/SF coated | [ | |
| PGFP | Crosslinking between branched poly(glycerol-amino acid), polypyrrole/polydopamine (PPy/PDA) nanoparticles and aldehyde F127 (PGFP scaffolds) | 5 wt % PPy/PDA | N/A | N/A | 1.9 × 10−3 | 6.7 × 10−3 | Showed outstanding rheological properties, controlled electrical conductivity and skin-adhesive behaviour | [ | |||
| rBC/PPy/CNT | Dissolving the polymerized BC/PPy in aqueous NaOH/urea solution, then the CNTs were impregnated (physical and chemical crosslinking) | N/A | 3.47 × 10−10 (rBC) | 1.67 × 10−3 | Good biocompatibility for NIH3T3 cell proliferation | [ | |||||
| Muscle | ~1.25 × 10−3 [ | PANI/PCL | Electrospinning to create aligned nanofibers of PANI/PCL | 3 wt% PANI | N/A | 6.36 × 10−2 | 76% cell viability vs. 63% of bare PCL (day 3). Aligned fiber increases number of myotube, myotube average length & maturation index relative to its randomly aligned counterpart | [ | |||
| CSA-PANI/gelatin | Doping of PANI/gelatin with CSA, fabricated with electrospinning | Gelatin 20% + CSA 5% + PANI 5% | 9.1 × 10−7 | 4.2 × 10−3 | 34% myotubes matured compared to pristine sample (11%) at 4 days. Introduction of ES significantly increased the level of Ca2+ transient | [ | |||||
| PEGS-AP | Copolymer creation by grafting AP onto the backbone of PEGS | 9.3 wt% AP | N/A | 1.74 × 10−4 | 2 × 108 fluorescence intensity of live/dead C2C12 cells compared to 5 × 107 of bare PEGS. Excessive AP loading beyond 9.3 wt% leads to significantly decreased biocompatibility | [ | |||||
| PEG/PEDOT:PSS hydrogel | Micropatterned PEG hydrogel, followed by in situ PEDOT polymerization on top of the PEG substrate | N/A | N/A | 2.49 × 10−3 | Aligned micropattern is able to enhance myotube differentiation and aspect ratio by providing topographical cues alongside electrical cues from ES | [ | |||||
| Cardiac | ~1 × 10−3 [ | CG-PPy | Doping PPy with FeCl3 and mixed with CG | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.007 | 0.023 | Increased expression of heart-specific genes (cTNT and Cx43) at 7 and 14 post culture days occurred in the CG-PPy scaffolds | [ | |
| PAN/PANI/GO | GO as dopants for the PANI in fabrication of PAN/PANI scaffold by plasma treatment | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.01 | 0.5 | Increase cell-scaffold interactions, biocompatibility, and cardiac a-MHC antibody was expressed significantly with the presence of GO | [ | |||
| CS/PVA/PEDOT:PSS | Adding PEDOT:PSS to CS/PVA to fabricate scaffold through the electrospinning method | 1% of PEDOT:PSS | 6 × 10−5 | 7.63 × 10−3 | Improves | [ | |||||
| Chitosan/PANI | Grew polyaniline (PANI) doped with phytic acid through polymerization on the surface of the chitosan film | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.162 | Early in vivo experiments indicates the scaffold did not induce proarrhythmogenic activity in the heart | [ | ||||
Figure 7Schematic illustration of electroactive scaffold to induce bone regeneration. Reproduced with permission from [113]. Copyright (2020) Royal Society of Chemistry.
Figure 8The mechanism of how electroconductive materials trigger the nerve regeneration through intracellular signalling. Reproduced with permission from [136]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.
Figure 9TEP and electric field at wound site before and after healing process. Reproduced with permission from [154]. Copyright (2021) John Wiley and Sons.
Figure 10Quantification of % of initial scratch area for the different groups. * Significant difference with the control group (p = 0.05); # Significant difference between the designated groups (p < 0.05). Reproduced with permission from [37]. Copyright (2019) Elsevier.
Figure 11Effect of PANI addition to myotube formation and alignment. (A) Gelatin 20%, (B) Gelatin 20% + CSA 5%, (C) Gelatin 20% + CSA 5% + PANI 5%, (D) Gelatin 20% + CSA 5% + PANI 10%, (E) Myotube length quantification, and (F) Myotube aspect ratio quantification. * Significant difference between the groups (p < 0.001). Adapted with permission from [183]. Copyright (2017) American Chemical Society.
Figure 12(a) Manufacturing route of PVC-DIDA electroactive thermoplastic gel. Heating at ~130 °C accelerates the speed in which the plasticizer is absorbed by the PVC, turning the plastisol into wet crumbly paste; (b) Extrusion scheme of PVC-DIDA gel. Adapted with permission from [218]. Copyright (2019) IOP Publishing.
Figure 13(a) Plasma-assisted bioextrusion system (PABS) 3D printer unit; (b) plasma modification unit; (c) sequence of operation for PABS 3D printing of bio-scaffold. Reproduced with permission from [223]. Copyright (2018) Elsevier.
Figure 144D printing of electroactive shape-changing samples. (a) Shape-changing behavior when exposed to 200 V DC electrical stimuli; (b) Design and circuit design of biomimetic mimosa leaves; (c) Single-row demonstration of biomimetic mimosa leaves, and (d) Double-row demonstration of biomimetic mimosa leaves. Reproduced with permission from [233]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier.