Han Liu1,2,3, Lin Qiu4, Hao Liu2,3, Fengji Li5, Yaru Fan2,3,6, Lulu Meng7, Xiaoqian Sun1,2,3, Chaojun Zhan1,2,3, Rui Luo1,2,3, Chao Wang2, Jun Zhang2,3, Ruixin Li2,3. 1. School of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin 300041, China. 2. Tianjin Stomatological Hospital, Tianjin 300041, China. 3. Tianjin Key Laboratory of Oral and Maxillofacial Function Reconstruction, Tianjin 300041, China. 4. Central Laboratory, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China. 5. Shenzhen Luohu Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen Hospital of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen 518001, China. 6. Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin 300203, China. 7. Tianjin University of Technology, Tianjin 300384, China.
Abstract
The three-dimensional (3D) printing technology combined with bone tissue engineering has become one of the major methods for mandibular reconstruction. However, the key factor retarding mandible reconstruction is the barrier of understanding and achieving the complex 3D gridwork formed by the trabeculae. This study innovatively constructed a low-temperature 3D printing silk fibroin/collagen/hydroxyapatite (SF/COL/HA) composite scaffold with a stable structure and remarkable biocompatibility. We designed three kinds of six-layer scaffolds with mixed fiber cross-angle structures (FCAS) of [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°], [0°/45°/90°/135°/180°/225°] and [0°/30°/60°/90°/120°/150°]. Material properties of these scaffolds such as porosity, water absorption rate, X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and compression performance were detected. Then, the MC3T3-E1 cells were seeded on these scaffolds and the adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation were investigated. To be more convincing, the same experiments were performed on another polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffold. The results suggested that the changes of FCAS affected the mechanical properties of 3D printed scaffolds and performance of seeded cells. Besides, the 90° FCAS significantly enhanced the compressive modulus in two groups and were more conducive to the cell proliferation and osteogenesis, which provided evidence for exploring the influence of FCAS on the properties of scaffolds and the application of two composite scaffolds in tissue regeneration.
The three-dimensional (3D) printing technology combined with bone tissue engineering has become one of the major methods for mandibular reconstruction. However, the key factor retarding mandible reconstruction is the barrier of understanding and achieving the complex 3D gridwork formed by the trabeculae. This study innovatively constructed a low-temperature 3D printing silk fibroin/collagen/hydroxyapatite (SF/COL/HA) composite scaffold with a stable structure and remarkable biocompatibility. We designed three kinds of six-layer scaffolds with mixed fiber cross-angle structures (FCAS) of [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°], [0°/45°/90°/135°/180°/225°] and [0°/30°/60°/90°/120°/150°]. Material properties of these scaffolds such as porosity, water absorption rate, X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and compression performance were detected. Then, the MC3T3-E1 cells were seeded on these scaffolds and the adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation were investigated. To be more convincing, the same experiments were performed on another polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffold. The results suggested that the changes of FCAS affected the mechanical properties of 3D printed scaffolds and performance of seeded cells. Besides, the 90° FCAS significantly enhanced the compressive modulus in two groups and were more conducive to the cell proliferation and osteogenesis, which provided evidence for exploring the influence of FCAS on the properties of scaffolds and the application of two composite scaffolds in tissue regeneration.
The reconstruction of
large segmental mandibular defects, caused
by trauma, osteomyelitis, or tumor resection, remains a clinical concern.
Irreparable defects led to severe maxillofacial deformity and masticatory
function loss, which reduced the patients’ quality of life.
However, the mandible is the only movable load-bearing bone of the
skull that needs to withstand the force in function. It also needs
adequate bone mass to support dental implants. This makes the mandibular
reconstruction more changeable.[1] The ideal
solution, which can replace the formation and function of the mandible,
has never been found. One promising approach for meeting these clinical
needs could be the implementation of a three-dimensional (3D) additive
manufacturing customized tissue engineering (TE) scaffold.The
construction of scaffolds for medical implantation was a mainstream
application of 3D printing in biomedicine. TE is the combination of
materials engineering and life science, which can create artificial
structures for the tissue regeneration. Because the human body is
a complex biological and sensitive system, the requirements of TE
scaffold are extremely manifold and challenging.[2] Biomaterials for 3D printing TE scaffold must be available
for printability, biocompatibility, sufficient mechanical properties,
sterilizability, and degradability.[3] A
further requirement for a scaffold particularly in bone engineering
is a controllable interconnected porosity to allow for the cells to
grow into the desired physical form and to support vascularization
of the ingrown tissues.[4] 3D printing-based
technologies can offer great precision to control internal architecture
of scaffolds and print complicated structures based on the defection.Biomaterials for TE can be broadly divided into synthetic and natural
materials. The natural materials, such as alginate,[5] hyaluronic acid,[6] collagen,[7,8] fibrin,[8,9] and so on, have excellent biocompatibility
and biodegradability. The synthetic polymers, such as polycaprolactone,
bioactive glass,[10] and polylactic acid
(PLA),[11] can promote the scaffold stability
and stabilize their interaction with tissues. In addition, hydroxyapatite
is the main inorganic component of bone and its addition can obviously
improve the mechanical properties of the material. All these materials
can simulate the structures of natural bones and promote bone regeneration,
making them to be the ideal scaffolds for bone TE. Early studies pointed
out that collagen–HA composite scaffolds supported the osteogenic
differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs) both in vitro and in vivo as demonstrated.[7] It was confirmed that apatite-coated silk fibroin
scaffolds could be successfully applied to repair mandibular critical
size border defects.[9] The collagen–silk
fibroin/hydroxyapatite bi-template-induced biomimetic bone substitutes
were prepared and found to be able to support the attachment and proliferation
of BMSCs better than the single-template materials.[8] In a recent study, a pretreated polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite
(PCL/HA) scaffold was constructed and implanted into the subcritical
cranial defect of rats and resulted in excellent osteogenesis.[12] Bioactive synthetic bone implants may contribute
to reconstruction and function of bone defects by serving as a scaffold
for bone growth, thus promoting the healing process. These previous
studies provided considerable cues for our selection of materials.One clinical challenge of mandible reconstruction maybe the difficulty
in understanding and achieving the complex 3D gridwork formed by the
trabeculae. Therefore, in addition to choosing suitable scaffold materials,
we also need to evaluate the spatial structure of the scaffold. The
spatial geometry of the pores in the scaffold constitutes material
transport properties, which in turn determined local nutrient supply,
endovascular, and host–graft interactions.[13] The change of microstructure affects the mechanical properties
of the scaffold. Studies have revealed that the 0°/45°/90°
scaffold exhibited the highest tensile strength in a mixed isotropic
carbon fiber 3D-printed composite.[14] Therefore,
it is necessary to apply the spatial structure design to the construction
of bone TE scaffolds. These scaffolds can serve as templates for the
formation of bone-like tissue and allow for the controlled engineering
of different bone-like structures originated from a single scaffold.In this study, we aimed to design three kinds of simple, stable,
and repeatable structures. We rotated the fiber counterclockwise at
90, 45, 30° and printed six layers because these three angles
are common and convenient. Moreover, when we multiplied them by a
certain integer multiple, it makes 360°, which makes the structure
more regular. In this way, we prepared scaffolds with FCASs of [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°],
[0°/45°/90°/135°/180°/225°] and [0°/30°/60°/90°/120°/150°].
Two porous bioresorbable nanocomposite bone scaffolds including SF/COL/HA
and PCL/HA were investigated by low-temperature deposition 3D printing
technology for the effect of FCASs on the TE scaffold. X-ray diffraction
(XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) were utilized to characterize the composites.
The mechanical properties, proliferation, and osteogenesis properties
of MC3T3-E1cells in scaffolds with mixed FCASs were further investigated.
Results
Establishment of the 3D
Printed Scaffolds
From the top views of three-dimensional
digital models of composite
scaffolds with three kinds of FCASs (Figure A), the fiber-cross
angle on model surfaces were uniform and stable (Figure B). All these freeze-dried
scaffolds were oyster white with a stable structure. The interconnected
channels seen on the surface were actually created by a 3D printing
technique to provide a pathway for the transport of essential nutrients
and metabolic wastes into the central regions of the cell-loaded scaffolds.
The shape of pore in 90° scaffold was square while those in 45
and 30° scaffolds were rhombus. These fibers in the 30°
scaffold stretched out in more directions, so the surface seemed more
denser when stacked (Figure C–E).
Figure 2
Schematic diagram and appearance of composite scaffolds with mixed
fiber cross angle. (A) 3D models of composite scaffolds. (B) Fiber
cross angle on model surfaces. (C) Appearance of freeze-dried PCL/HA
scaffold. (D) Appearance of freeze-dried SF/COL/HA scaffold. (E) Scattered
models with focus on one point and stack six layers.
Overall process of scaffold fabrication.Schematic diagram and appearance of composite scaffolds with mixed
fiber cross angle. (A) 3D models of composite scaffolds. (B) Fiber
cross angle on model surfaces. (C) Appearance of freeze-dried PCL/HA
scaffold. (D) Appearance of freeze-dried SF/COL/HA scaffold. (E) Scattered
models with focus on one point and stack six layers.
3D Printed Scaffolds had Interlinked Microscopic
Pores
The composite scaffolds were examined by SEM to evaluate
their ultrastructure. All scaffolds with FCAS had regular structures
and interconnected pores. There were many irregular round micropores
on the surface of SF/COL/HA scaffold and many irregular strips micropores
on the surface of PCL/HA scaffold. These micropores were conducive
to cell attachment and proliferation. On the surfaces of these scaffolds,
an integrated network of pores could be seen with high interconnectivity
(Figure ).
Figure 3
SEM micrographs
of composite scaffolds from top view. (A–C)
SF/COL/HA scaffold with 90°, 45°, 30°, 50× (D)
SF/COL/HA scaffold, 200×. (E) SF/COL/HA scaffold, 400×.
(F–H) PCL/HA scaffold with 90, 45, 30°, 50×. (I)
The PCL/HA scaffold, 200×. (J) PCL/HA scaffold, 400×.
SEM micrographs
of composite scaffolds from top view. (A–C)
SF/COL/HA scaffold with 90°, 45°, 30°, 50× (D)
SF/COL/HA scaffold, 200×. (E) SF/COL/HA scaffold, 400×.
(F–H) PCL/HA scaffold with 90, 45, 30°, 50×. (I)
The PCL/HA scaffold, 200×. (J) PCL/HA scaffold, 400×.
Parameter of 3D Printed
Scaffolds met TE Scaffold
Requirements
Both kinds of composite scaffolds had suitable
porosity and water absorption (Figure A). The water absorption performance and porosity in
the SF/COL/HA scaffold were better (p < 0.01).
However, there were no statistical difference in scaffolds with mixed
FCAS (Figure J). Therefore,
subsequent studies on the scaffolds with mixed FCASs could exclude
the influence of porosity changes. It could be seen that in the SF/COL/HA
and PCL/HA scaffolds, the average diameter of pores was 0.47 and 0.45
mm, respectively. This might be due to the collapse of the SF/COL/HA
composite which increased the fiber diameter and decreased the aperture.
Figure 4
Physical
properties of 3D printed composite scaffolds. (A) Parameters
of different composite scaffolds. (B,E) Representative stress–strain
curves of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds with mixed fiber angles,
respectively. (C,F) XRD of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(D,G) FTIR of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively. (H,I)
Elastic modulus of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds with mixed fiber
angles, respectively. (J) Porosity of composite scaffolds. (**P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001).
Physical
properties of 3D printed composite scaffolds. (A) Parameters
of different composite scaffolds. (B,E) Representative stress–strain
curves of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds with mixed fiber angles,
respectively. (C,F) XRD of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(D,G) FTIR of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively. (H,I)
Elastic modulus of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds with mixed fiber
angles, respectively. (J) Porosity of composite scaffolds. (**P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001).
Composition of Composite
Materials
The phase composition of composite scaffolds was
characterized by
XRD. The results suggested that the characteristic diffraction peaks
of PCL, HA, SF, and COL were at 21–24°, 31–35°,
and 11–17°, respectively, indicating a much higher crystallinity
at these places (Figure C,F).The PCL related to stretching modes was observed in PCL/HA
scaffolds, including 2946 cm–1, 2868 cm–1 (CH2 stretching), 1727 cm–1 (carbonyl
stretching), and 1293 cm–1 (C–O and C–C
stretching in the crystalline phase). Typical proteins related to
bonds were found at 1652 cm–1 (amide I) and 1549
cm–1 (amide II), corresponding to C=O stretching
vibration, and coupling of bending of N–H bond and stretching
of C–N bond. The characteristic absorption peaks of HA were
found at 556, 599, 1030, 1163 cm–1 (different spatial
structures PO43– stretching), 1400–1450,
1631 cm–1 (CO32– stretching),
and 3547, 3291 cm–1 (OH– stretching),
respectively. Collagen and silk fibroin amide I and II were overlapped
completely at 1666 and 1519 cm–1, forming sharp
and narrow absorption peaks. 3069 and 3291 cm–1 were
characteristic peaks of collagen amide A and B. At 1631 cm–1, the β-pleated sheet of silk fibroin was coincided with CO32– stretching of HA (Figure D,G).
90°
FCAS had a Better Mechanical Property
Representative stress–strain
curves of the 3D printed scaffolds
with mixed FCASs were displayed. The compression stress–strain
test results showed that the scaffold materials were viscoelastic.
All scaffolds were able to automatically return to their original
shapes after a certain range of external forces. Below 10% strain,
the figure line was approximately linear, so we chose the slope of
the stress–strain curve when the strain value was less than
10%, part of a straight line, as the elastic modulus (Figure B,E). It was indicated that
the stress–strain changed with the varying FCAS. The elastic
modulus of 90, 45, and 30° in the SF/COL/HA scaffold was (39.89
± 3.09) kPa, (29.7 ± 2.21) kPa, and (12.9 ± 1.44) kPa,
respectively (Figure H). The elastic modulus of 90, 45, and 30° in the PCL/HA scaffold
was (2.0 ± 0.15) MPa, (0.9 ± 0.04) Mpa, and (0.45 ±
0.07) MPa, respectively (Figure I). The 90° scaffold showed the maximum elastic
modulus and the 30° showed the minimum elastic modulus. The tendency
of the results on SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds was consistent. Overall,
the 90° FCAS significantly increased the compressive modulus
compared with the 30 and 45° FCASs in all groups (p < 0.01).
3D Printed Scaffolds had
No Significant Inhibitory
or Toxic Effects on MC3T3-E1 Cells
By calcein-AM/PI double
staining and cell counting, it was found that both SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA
scaffolds had significantly more living cells (green fluorescence)
than dead cells (red fluorescence) (p < 0.001)
(Figure A–C).
The results showed that the liquid extract of these scaffolds had
no cytotoxicity and could be used for MC3T3-E1 cell culture.
Figure 5
Biocompatibility
of 3D printed scaffolds. (A) Fluorescence imaging
of calcein-AM/PI staining in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds. Green
and red fluorescence represent living and dead cells, respectively.
(B,C) Cellular state in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(D) SEM images of blank SF/COL/HA scaffold, (E) SEM images of SF/COL/HA
scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells. (F) SEM images of blank PCL/HA scaffold,
(G) SEM images of PCL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells. The blue arrows
are the MC3T3-E1 cells. (***P < 0.001).
Biocompatibility
of 3D printed scaffolds. (A) Fluorescence imaging
of calcein-AM/PI staining in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds. Green
and red fluorescence represent living and dead cells, respectively.
(B,C) Cellular state in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(D) SEM images of blank SF/COL/HA scaffold, (E) SEM images of SF/COL/HA
scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells. (F) SEM images of blank PCL/HA scaffold,
(G) SEM images of PCL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells. The blue arrows
are the MC3T3-E1 cells. (***P < 0.001).SEM showed that cells were attached to the surface
of SF/COL/HA
and PCL/HA scaffolds. The cells on both types of scaffolds were spindle-shaped
or star-shaped, indicating a normal expansion. The cells showed a
large number of filopodia, which were firmly attached to the surfaces
of the materials. It facilitated the cells on the scaffold to furtherly
spread and contact with each other, forming a thin layer. Some of
the cells remained unicellular and scattered, leaving efficient room
for further proliferation (Figure D–G).At 14 days after culture, MC3T3-E1
cells were found not only on
the surface but also inside the scaffolds. By HE staining, the cells
were found to grow into the microporous structure of the scaffolds.
Cells adhered to the fibers on the parts of the scaffolds, which left
efficient space for the proliferation and the formation of a typical
spindle shape. At the turning point, the cells grew more densely on
all scaffolds with mixed FCASs (Figure ). The toughness of the PCL/HA scaffolds was too high
to perform the cutting.
Figure 6
Hematoxylin–eosin (HE) staining of SF/COL/HA
scaffold with
MC3T3-E1 cells. (A–C) 90° SF/COL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1
cells at 4×, 10×, 40× views, respectively. (D–F)
45° SF/COL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells at 4×, 10×,
40× views, respectively. (G–I) 30° SF/COL/HA scaffold
with MC3T3-E1 cells at 4×, 10×, 40× views, respectively.
The blue arrows are the MC3T3-E1 cells.
Hematoxylin–eosin (HE) staining of SF/COL/HA
scaffold with
MC3T3-E1 cells. (A–C) 90° SF/COL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1
cells at 4×, 10×, 40× views, respectively. (D–F)
45° SF/COL/HA scaffold with MC3T3-E1 cells at 4×, 10×,
40× views, respectively. (G–I) 30° SF/COL/HA scaffold
with MC3T3-E1 cells at 4×, 10×, 40× views, respectively.
The blue arrows are the MC3T3-E1 cells.
90° FCAS Promoted the Proliferation of
MC3T3-E1 Cells
It could be found that during the seven days,
the OD value of each group increased with time. In Figure A, the OD value on day 1 in
the 90° SF/COL/HA scaffold was lower than that in the 45 and
30° scaffolds (p < 0.01). On day 3, it showed
a similar trend with a maximum in the 45° scaffold (p < 0.01). Interestingly, the value in the 90° scaffold was
reversed with time and higher than that in the 30° scaffold on
day 7 (p < 0.05). A similar trend occurred to
the PCL/HA scaffold on day 1. However, the highest value was observed
after the cells were cultured in the 90° scaffold for five and
seven days (p < 0.01) and the value in the 45°
scaffold was higher than that in the 30° scaffold (p < 0.05) (Figure D). The results indicated that MC3T3-E1 cells proliferated in all
scaffolds had a good condition and the proliferation performance was
changed with the varying FCAS.
Figure 7
Proliferation and osteogenesis properties
of MC3T3-E1 cells in
mixed fiber angle scaffolds. (A,D) Cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assay
was used to detect the proliferation activity of MC3TC-E1 cells in
SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively (B,E) ALP assay was used
to detect the osteogenesis activity of MC3TC-E1 cells in SF/COL/HA
and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively. (C,F) Expression of proliferation-
and osteogenesis-related mRNA in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(*P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01).
Proliferation and osteogenesis properties
of MC3T3-E1 cells in
mixed fiber angle scaffolds. (A,D) Cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assay
was used to detect the proliferation activity of MC3TC-E1 cells in
SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively (B,E) ALP assay was used
to detect the osteogenesis activity of MC3TC-E1 cells in SF/COL/HA
and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively. (C,F) Expression of proliferation-
and osteogenesis-related mRNA in SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds, respectively.
(*P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01).Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis
showed that
in the SF/COL/HA scaffold on day 7, the relative expression levels
of cell proliferation-related transcription factors (PCNA) in the
90 and 45° scaffolds were higher than those in the 30° scaffold
(p < 0.01) (Figure C). In the PCL/HA scaffold, the relative expression
levels of PCNA in the 90° scaffold was higher than these in the
45 and 30° scaffolds (p < 0.05) (Figure F). All in all, the
cells showed a stronger proliferation performance in 90° scaffold.
FCAS Affected Osteogenesis Differentiation
Viability of MC3T3-E1 Cell
According to the detection of
alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, there was no statistical difference
in the SF/COL/HA scaffold with mixed FCASs (Figure B). However, the PCL/HA scaffold with 90°
FCAS exhibited the strongest ALP activity (p <
0.01) (Figure E).
RT-PCR analysis showed that in the SF/COL/HA scaffold on day 7, the
expression levels of ALP and COL-1 in scaffolds with mixed FCASs tended
to be consistent, but they had the highest expression levels of OPN
in the 90° scaffold and RUNX2 was more highly expressed in the
90 and 30° scaffolds than in the 45° scaffold (p < 0.01) (Figure C). In the PCL/HA scaffold on day 7, the expression levels of ALP
and COL-1 in the 90° scaffold were the highest (p < 0.01). OPN and RUNX2 were more highly expressed in the 90 and
45° scaffolds than that in the 30° scaffold. These results
suggested that the 90° scaffold showed a remarkable osteogenic
property and the difference was more pronounced in the PCL/HA scaffold
(Figure F).
Discussion
The mandible is a crucial organ in the stomatognathic
system with
a complex function. When the mandible is reconstructed, it needs to
withstand the forces transmitted during mastication. The bone mass
and activity in the trabecular bone vary between bones with different
functions. As the function is variable in the regions of incisor,
premolar, and molar in the mandible and dependent on the state of
dentition, a variation in bone structure in the cancellous bone within
the single mandible would be expected.[15] The elastic properties of cancellous bone could be related to mineral
contents as well as to density and architecture.[16] Although the precise mechanism of adaptation is uncertain,
it is generally believed that the architecture of the trabecular bone
corresponds to mechanical loading. S. TENG[17] explored trabecular-plate thickness, separation, and trabecular
number, showing a significant linear relation between connectivity,
trabecular-plate thickness, and bone-volume fraction based on the
stereological principle. The structural density and the ratio of trabecular
thickness to length or separation were correlated with Young’s
modulus and bone strength. These studies provided the inspiration
for our experiment.With advances in three-dimensional manufacturing,
TE scaffold can
be spatially structured not only to mimic natural organs but also
to allow for the transplantation of cells in large quantities. Layered
design of the topographic and spatial features of scaffolds was a
key step in facilitating TE and cell therapy.[18] Each physicochemical characteristic of the biomaterial surface (such
as topographical features, stiffness, functional groups, and interfacial
free energy) could profoundly affect biochemical mechanisms.[19] The potential for nacre topography to be used
for regulating osteogenic differentiation and the controlled cell
differentiation strategies aided in the translation of cell therapies
to the clinic.[20] The thick fibers and large
pores of electrospun poly markedly were found to enhance cell infiltration
and extracellular matrix (ECM) secretion.[21]Rapid prototyping of thermoplastic materials such as PCL,
PLA,
and poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) using fused deposition
modeling (FDM) is an accurate, repeatable, and sterilized method for
obtaining 3D models. However, due to the relatively high temperature
of the operation, FDM does not support simultaneous printing of cells
or temperature-sensitive biomaterials.[22] Low-temperature 3D printing can preserve the biological activity
of the material. Compared with scaffolds printed by the FDM technology,
low-temperature deposition modeling printed sponges enhanced adhesion,
proliferation, and migration of MSCs. Further functional analysis
suggested that focal adhesion kinase, downstream AKT, and yes-associated
protein signaling were involved in the required mechanical transduction
pathways, through which the multilayer porous structure stimulated
the paracrine effect of MSCs.[23] In this
study, we innovatively constructed a low-temperature 3D printing SF/COL/HA
scaffold. The biological activity of the material protein could be
retained by low-temperature 3D printing. Collagen is the main component
of organic matter in natural bone tissue and the ECM secreted by osteoblasts
during osteogenesis. It is widely used in bone tissue engineering.[7,8] Our research found that, the SF/COL/HA composite scaffold restored
good material stability and cell compatibility, and MC3T3-E1 cells
exhibited proliferation and osteogenic differentiation on it. It showed
a spongy structure with interwoven microcolumns, which was similar
to those of natural trabecular bones.On the basis of the existing
traditional 90° scaffold morphology,
we innovatively proposed two new scaffold structures. The three kinds
of six-layer scaffolds were designed with mixed FCASs of [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°],
[0°/45°/90°/135°/180°/225°] and [0°/30°/60°/90°/120°/150°],
respectively. By comparing their mechanical properties and the proliferation
and osteogenesis properties of MC3T3-E1cells cultured on them, it
was suggested that there was a significantly increased compressive
modulus in the 90° fiber structure compared with 30 and 45°
scaffolds. The reason might be the change of FCAS in the contact area
and method between the adjacent fibers, which could change the overall
mechanical properties of the support. Therefore, under the same volume
and porosity, three kinds of different mechanical properties scaffolds
could be obtained using the same composition. Our experiment confirmed
that the performance of scaffold could be changed by the regularly
changing of FCAS based on unchanged scaffold materials. This difference
can be utilized in the subsequent construction of the complex mandible
scaffolds.The existing studies on changing the FCAS of scaffolds
focused
more on mechanical properties than on cells[14] and the mechanical properties of ECM could influence the properties
of cells,[24] we designed the scaffolds to
further characterize the performance of seeded cells. In this study,
when the FCAS was demonstrated to modulate the mechanical properties,
the MC3T3-E1 cells were seeded on these scaffolds and the properties
of cells were detected by SEM, HE, CCK, ALP, and RT-PCR. In order
to make our results more convincing and avoid the contingency of our
materials, the three forms of combinations of PCL/HA with higher hardness
were selected to repeat the above experiments.[12] Both kinds of composite scaffolds had suitable porosity
and water absorption, which facilitated medium absorption and infiltration
and satisfied the basic characteristics of TE materials.The
structure of scaffolds was treated as a priority for cellular
colonization in tissue regeneration, which would induce the interaction
of cells with the scaffolds. The initial adhesion efficiency of MC3T3-E1
cells to the 90° scaffold was unsatisfactory. It might be related
to the lower surface density and higher pore connectivity in the 90°
scaffold. Over time, the cells cultured in the 90° scaffold performed
an outstanding proliferation. RT-PCR analysis for osteogenic differentiation-related
transcription factors and assay for ALP activity found that in SF/COL/HA
scaffolds, the expression of OPN and RUNX2 in the 90° scaffold
were outstanding and there were increased COL-1, OPN, and RUNX2 in
the 90° PCL/HA scaffold with enhanced ALP activity. This might
suggest that FCASs affected cell proliferation and osteogenic properties,
and the 90° structure was superior inside. Most results of two
composite materials shared the same general trend. Without changing
the materials to avoid complicated effects, the shape and structure
can be changed by changing the FCAS to realize it. It provided feasibility
to design gradient bone scaffolds, some parts will be stiffness and
others will be softness. In future research, we shall superimpose
mixed FCASs together and print them in combination according to needs.
Furthermore, it can be combined with finite element analysis, which
provides a new idea for the simulation design of complex bone scaffolds.
Few studies have been conducted on the effects of FCASs.
Conclusions
The SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds relied on
low-temperature deposition
3D printing were two high-performance bioengineering materials. The
pore size, porosity, water absorption, and elastic modulus of the
composite scaffolds, all met the requirements of constructing tissue
engineered bones. Changing of the FCAS in scaffolds determines varying
degrees of effects on the mechanical properties, as well as the adhesion,
proliferation, and osteogenic differentiation of MC3T3-E1 cells. Among
them, the 90° FCAS significantly increased the compressive modulus
in two groups and more conducive to the MC3T3-E1 cell proliferation
and osteogenesis. This study provided the preliminary basis for the
influence of FCAS on the properties of composite scaffolds and research
of SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA scaffolds in mandibular reconstruction.
Materials and Methods
Preparation of SF/COL/HA
Composite Biomaterials
The natural silk was boiled in an
aqueous solution of 0.5% Na2CO3 three times
for 30 min. After dialysis, filtration,
concentration, and centrifugation, a certain concentration of silk
fibroin protein solution was obtained. Collagen was prepared by a
salting out method by adding fresh bovine tendon to acetic acid solution
with pepsin. Silk fibroin was mixed with the collagen and HA (Emperor,
Nanjing) at a mass ratio of 5:4:1 and stirred for 4 h. A moderate
amount of acetic acid could be added to aid mixing (Figure ).
Figure 1
Overall process of scaffold fabrication.
Preparation
of PCL/HA Composite Biomaterials
PCL (average Mn = 80 000) and
acetic acid (purity 99.8%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA)
and Pronolab (Lisboa, Portugal), respectively. PCL was dissolved in
acetic acid to produce a solution with a concentration of 15% w/v.
HA was added to PCL solution at a mass ratio of 1:4 and stirred for
24 h to promote a complete dissolution (Figure ).
Model Specification
Three kinds of
microstructural scaffold models with FCASs of [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°],
[0°/45°/90°/135°/180°/225°] and [0°/30°/60°/90°/120°/150°]
were designed using Abaqus CAE software. In between, the positive
direction of X and Y axis was 0
and 90°, respectively, and the Z axis was the
height adjustment direction. The crossing angle in fiber between two
adjacent floors were 90, 45, and 30°, respectively. (The following
references were described with these) (Figure ). The model data were converted to STL and
imported into a 3D printer (Organ P 1800).
Low-Temperature
Deposition 3D Printing
These prepared composite materials
were loaded into the needle tubing.
In the printing process, the printing parameters and floor temperature
were set up to ensure the molding. The samples were then freeze–dried
using a freeze dryer (EYELA FDU-1200) at low temperature and cross-linked
under absolute alcohol at room temperature for 24 h, respectively.
After cross-linked, the scaffolds were treated with NaOH (PH = 10),
washed with deionized water, sterilized with Co60, and
saved in −20 °C.
Compression Test
The scaffolds with
1 cm2 were compressed to a 30% strain of total thickness
with a 0.5%/s compression speed. We performed a compression test with
a care electromagnetic dynamic mechanics test system M-100T apparatus
(Care M-100T) and non-contact image acquisition system. After that,
the stress–strain diagram of each scaffold was obtained. We
chose the slope of the stress–strain curve when the strain
value was less than 10%, part of a straight line, as the elastic modulus.
The test was repeated for three times.
X-Ray
Diffraction
Crystallinity of
the SF/COL/HA and PCL/HA composites was studied using the XRD. This
experiment was conducted by a Bruker D8 ADVANCE apparatus, Cu target,
at room temperature. Spectra were acquired to qualitatively assess
phase composition of the composite materials. Spectra were acquired
from 2θ range of 10–80° with a step size of 0.02°.
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
The FTIR experiment was carried out with a FTS6000 Fourier transform
infrared spectrometer (Bio-rad). The tested sample and potassium bromide
were mixed and pressed to prepare the sample. A wavelength of 11 000–400
cm–1 and a resolution 0.075 cm–1. The chemical composition of the sample was determined by comparing
with the standard peak spectral.
Porosity
Estimation
An improved fluid
transfer method was used to measure porosity. The scaffold was immersed
in graduated cylinder with a certain volume (v1) of ethanol. The total
volume of ethanol containing the saturated scaffold was v2. When the
saturated scaffold was removed from the cylinder, the residue ethanol
volume was recorded as v3. Porosity = (v1 – v3)/(v2 –
v3) ×100%.[25] All experiments were
repeated for three times.
Water Absorption Ratio
The over dried
scaffolds were weighed at a weight of m1. The scaffolds were then
immersed in a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; pH = 7.4) for 24 h at
37 °C. At sampling point, they were removed from the PBS solution
and weighed for a weight of m2. Water absorption ratio = (m2 –
m1)/m1 × 100%.[26] All experiments were
repeated for three times.
Cell Culture
The pre-osteoblast
cell line MC3T3-E1 was purchased from BMCR (Chinese Academy of Medical
Science). The cells were cultured in culture flasks with α-MEM
(Gibco, USA) supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% penicillin/streptomycin
solution (Solarbio, China) at 37 °C and 5% CO2. When
reached 80–90% confluence, cells were passaged.
Calcein-AM/PI Staining
The preparation
of the liquid extracts from the scaffolds follows the standard of
liquid extract (GB/T1688 and ISO10993). The ratio of scaffold surface
area to medium volume was 1 cm2/mL. After the scaffolds
were stored in complete medium at 4 °C for 48 h, the corresponding
liquid extracts from the scaffolds were obtained for being used in
cell cultures. The staining was performed according to the instructions
of calcein-AM/PI living/dead cell double staining kit to observe the
survival of the cells.
Scanning Electron Microscopy
The
cells were seeded on each scaffold at a density of 1 × 105/cm2 and cultured for seven days. The cell–scaffold
complexes were then fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde, dehydrated by
gradually increasing grade of alcohol. They were then coated by gold
and observed by a SU8100 scanning electron microscope (Hitachi, Japan).
HE Staining
The cells were seeded
on each scaffold at a density of 1 × 105/cm2 and cultured for 14 days. The medium was replaced every two days.
At sampling point, the cell–scaffold complexes were removed
from the medium and fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin for 4 h.
After dehydration, paraffin embedding and sectioning, the samples
were stained with HE to observe cell distribution in the scaffolds.
CCK-8 Assay
The cells were seeded
on each 5 mm2 scaffold at a density of 1 × 105/cm2 in a 24-well plate. The next day, the cell–scaffold
complexes were transferred to a new plate to prevent the proliferation
of unattached cells on the plate. At 1, 3, 5, and 7d of culture, the
medium in each well was replaced by 500 μL α-MEM, then
50 μL CCK-8 solution (Solarbio, China) was added to each well.
They were then incubated in darkness at 37 °C for 4 h. The absorbance
value (OD) was measured at 450 nm with a multi-function enzyme labeling
instrument (Tecan, Switzerland).
ALP
Activity
The cells were seeded
on the scaffolds at a density of 1 × 105/cm2 and cultured for seven days. After rinsing the scaffolds with PBS,
they were removed into the EP tubes with 500 μL of lysate followed
by centrifuged at 12 000 rpm for 5 min for the supernatant.
The ALP activity was detected and calculated according to the instruction
of ALP Assay Kit (Beyotime, China).
Real-Time
PCR
We took out the cell–scaffold
complexes at day 7 and added it into the EP tube, fully sheared the
scaffold into pieces. Total RNA in cells loaded on the scaffolds was
extracted using a Mini BEST Universal RNA Extraction Kit (TaKaRa,
Japan). Reverse transcription was performed using a Prime Script RT
reagent Kit (TaKaRa, Japan). The cDNA template was amplified by RT-PCR
using a TB Green Premix Ex Taq II (TaKaRa, Japan). GAPDH was used
as an internal control. RT-PCR was performed using a Light Cycler/Light
Cycler 480 System (Roche, Switzerland). The expression of mRNA was
calculated by 2–ΔΔCt. All experiments
were repeated for three times. All primers were purchased from Sangon
Biotech (China). GAPDH: Forward 5′-CAGCAACTCCCACTCTTC-3′;
Reverse 5′-TGTAGCCGTATTCATTGTC-3′; PCNA: Forward 5′-TTTGAGGCACGCCTGATCC-3′;
Reverse 5′-GGAGACGTGAGACGAGTCCAT-3′; ALP: Forward 5′-
TGACCTTCTCTCCTCCATCC-3′; Reverse 5′-CTTCCTGGGAGTCTCATCCT-3′;
OPN: Forward 5′-AACCAGCCAAGGTAAGCCTG-3′; Reverse 5′-AGTTAGTCCCTCAGAATTCAGCC-3′;
Runx2: Forward 5′-CCGAAATGCCTCCGCTGTTATG-3′; Reverse
5′-GGATTTGTGAAGACTGTTATGGT-3′; COL-1: Forward 5′-CAGTGGCGGTTATGACTT-3′;
Reverse 5′-CTGCGGATGTTCTCAATCT-3.
Statistical
Analysis
Statistical
analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 5.0 software (San Diego,
USA). All data were expressed as the mean ± the standard deviation.
Statistical difference between two groups was assessed by a two-tailed
student t-test. One-way ANOVA was used to the comparison
of data among more than two groups. P < 0.05 was
considered statistically significant.
Authors: Elliot L Chaikof; Howard Matthew; Joachim Kohn; Antonios G Mikos; Glenn D Prestwich; Christopher M Yip Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Sandra Hofmann; Henri Hagenmüller; Annette M Koch; Ralph Müller; Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic; David L Kaplan; Hans P Merkle; Lorenz Meinel Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2006-11-07 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Alireza Shahin-Shamsabadi; Ata Hashemi; Mohammadreza Tahriri; Farshid Bastami; Majid Salehi; Fatemeh Mashhadi Abbas Journal: Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl Date: 2018-04-26 Impact factor: 7.328
Authors: Bibiana F Matte; Aditya Kumar; Jesse K Placone; Virgílio G Zanella; Manoela D Martins; Adam J Engler; Marcelo L Lamers Journal: J Cell Sci Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Jonathan I Dawson; Denys A Wahl; Stuart A Lanham; Janos M Kanczler; Jan T Czernuszka; Richard O C Oreffo Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2008-04-28 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Shadi Hassanajili; Ali Karami-Pour; Ahmad Oryan; Tahereh Talaei-Khozani Journal: Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl Date: 2019-07-06 Impact factor: 7.328