| Literature DB >> 34906152 |
Xingzhi Zhou1,2,3, Jiayu Chen1,2,3, Hangxiang Sun1,2,3, Fangqian Wang1,2,3, Yikai Wang4, Zengjie Zhang1,2,3, Wangsiyuan Teng1,2,3, Yuxiao Ye5, Donghua Huang1,2,3, Wei Zhang1,2,3, Xianan Mo1,2,3, An Liu1,2,3, Peng Lin1,2,3, Yan Wu1,2,3, Huimin Tao6,7,8, Xiaohua Yu9,10,11, Zhaoming Ye12,13,14.
Abstract
Engineering approaches for growth factor delivery have been considerably advanced for tissue regeneration, yet most of them fail to provide a complex combination of signals emulating a natural healing cascade, which substantially limits their clinical successes. Herein, we aimed to emulate the natural bone healing cascades by coupling the processes of angiogenesis and osteogenesis with a hybrid dual growth factor delivery system to achieve vascularized bone formation. Basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) was loaded into methacrylate gelatin (GelMA) to mimic angiogenic signalling during the inflammation and soft callus phases of the bone healing process, while bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) was bound onto mineral coated microparticles (MCM) to mimics osteogenic signalling in the hard callus and bone remodelling phases. An Initial high concentration of bFGF accompanied by a sustainable release of BMP-2 and inorganic ions was realized to orchestrate well-coupled osteogenic and angiogenic effects for bone regeneration. In vitro experiments indicated that the hybrid hydrogel markedly enhanced the formation of vasculature in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs), as well as the osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs). In vivo results confirmed the optimal osteogenic performance of our F/G-B/M hydrogel, which was primarily attributed to the FGF-induced vascularization. This research presents a facile and potent alternative for treating bone defects by emulating natural cascades of bone healing.Entities:
Keywords: Angiogenesis; Growth factor; Hydrogel; Mineral coating; Osteogenesis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34906152 PMCID: PMC8670285 DOI: 10.1186/s12951-021-01173-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Scheme 1Schematic illustration of the fabrication and application of the F-G/B-M hybrid hydrogel
Fig. 1Morphology and characterizations of MCM, GelMA, and GelMA/MCM hydrogel. SEM micrographs of A β-TCP and B MCM. C SEM micrographs and digital photographs of GelMA and GelMA/MCM. D EDS of MCM. E XRD and F FTIR spectra of GelMA and GelMA/MCM. G Swelling test of GelMA and GelMA/MCM
Fig. 2Biocompatibility evaluation of GelMA/MCM hydrogel. Representative Live/Dead images of A HUVECs and G BMSCs at day 1. Quantitative analysis of cell viability of C HUVECs and D BMSCs. Representative F-actin/DAPI images of B HUVECs and (H) BMSCs at day 4. Cell counting kit-8 assay of E HUVECs and F BMSCs at day 1, 3, 5, and 7. Statistically significant differences are indicated with *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
Fig. 3A Schematic illustration of the GFs release behavior. B Release kinetics of BMP-2. C Release kinetics of bFGF. D, E Release kinetics of BMP-2 and bFGF. F Release kinetics of calcium ion. G Release kinetics of phosphate ion. H SEM micrographs of MCM after incubation in PBS for 7 days and 30 days
Fig. 4In vitro osteogenesis potential. A Representative ALP staining images on day 3. B Quantitative analysis of ALP activity of BMSCs. C Representative ARS images on day 14. D Quantitative analysis of calcium deposition of BMSCs. E, F Osteogenesis of BMSCs was measured by immunofluorescence assays for Runx2 expression on day 4, with the nucleus stained in blue and OCN stained in red. qRT-PCR analysis of osteogenesis-related gene expressions including G ALP, H Col-1, I Runx2. J Osterix and K OCN. Statistically significant differences are indicated with *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001
Fig. 5In vitro angiogenesis potential. A Representative fluorescence images of HUVECs after coculture for 3 and 6 h. B Quantification of total length, branch points, number of junctions, and number of meshes in HUVECs. C qRT-PCR analysis of angiogenesis-related gene expressions including CD31, ANG, vWF, and VEGF-A. Statistically significant differences are indicated with *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001
Fig. 6In vivo bone regeneration therapeutic efficacy. A 3D reconstructed micro CT images of the new bone formation after implantation for 4 and 8 weeks. Quantitative statistic of B BV/TV, C BMD, D Tb.Th, and E Tb.Sp of the newly formed bone at week 4 and week 8. BV/TV: bone volume fraction; BMD: bone mineral density; Tb.Th: trabecular thickness; Tb.Sp: trabecular separation. Statistically significant differences are indicated with *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001
Fig. 7Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining of newly formed bone in the defect after implantation with different hydrogels for 4 and 8 weeks. Representative images were observed by low magnification and high magnification, showing the newly formed tissue, including the fibrous tissue (FT) and newly mineralized bone tissue (NB)
Fig. 8Evaluation of in vivo vascularized osteogenesis at week 4 and 8. A Representative immunofluorescence staining images of Col-1 (green) and nuclei (blue). B Representative immunofluorescence histochemical staining of OCN (red) and nuclei (blue)
Fig. 9Evaluation of in vivo vascularized osteogenesis at week 4 and 8. A Representative immunofluorescence staining mages of bone vessels stained for CD31(red) and nuclei (blue) at week 4 and 8. B The semi-quantitative results of CD-31. Statistically significant differences are indicated with *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001