Nasrin Fazeli1, Ehsan Arefian2, Shiva Irani1, Abdolreza Ardeshirylajimi3, Ehsan Seyedjafari4. 1. Department of Biology, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran 14778 93855, Iran. 2. Department of Microbiology, School of Biology, College of Science, University of Tehran, Tehran 14179 35840, Iran. 3. Urogenital Stem Cell Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 19839 63113, Iran. 4. Department of Biotechnology, College of Science, University of Tehran, Tehran 14179 35840, Iran.
Abstract
With advances in bone tissue engineering, various materials and methods have been explored to find a better scaffold that can help in improving bone growth and regeneration. Three-dimensional (3D) printing by fused deposition modeling can produce customized scaffolds from biodegradable polyesters such as polycaprolactone (PCL). Although the fabricated PCL scaffolds exhibited a lack of bioactivity and poor cell attachment on their surfaces, herein, using a simple postfabrication modification method with hydroxyapatite (HA) and bioglasses (BGs), we obtained better cell proliferation and attachment. Biological behavior and osteosupportive capacity of the 3D-printed scaffolds including PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG were evaluated in this study, while human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hADSCs) were cultured on the scaffolds. The cell morphology, attachment, and proliferation were investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining. In the next step, the ability of stem cells to differentiate into osteoblasts was evaluated by measuring alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, calcium deposition, and bone-related gene and protein expression. In the end, the expression levels of miR-20a, miR-125a, and their target genes were also investigated as positive and negative regulators in osteogenesis pathways. The results showed that the coated scaffolds with bioceramics present a more appropriate surface for cell adhesion and proliferation, as well as efficient potential in inducing osteoconduction and osteointegration compared to PCL alone and control. The PCL/HA/BG scaffold exhibited higher in vitro cell viability and bone formation compared to the other groups, which can be due to the synergistic effect of HA and BG. On the whole, this tricomponent 3D-printing scaffold has a promising prospect for bone tissue engineering applications.
With advances in bone tissue engineering, various materials and methods have been explored to find a better scaffold that can help in improving bone growth and regeneration. Three-dimensional (3D) printing by fused deposition modeling can produce customized scaffolds from biodegradable polyesters such as polycaprolactone (PCL). Although the fabricated PCL scaffolds exhibited a lack of bioactivity and poor cell attachment on their surfaces, herein, using a simple postfabrication modification method with hydroxyapatite (HA) and bioglasses (BGs), we obtained better cell proliferation and attachment. Biological behavior and osteosupportive capacity of the 3D-printed scaffolds including PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG were evaluated in this study, while human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hADSCs) were cultured on the scaffolds. The cell morphology, attachment, and proliferation were investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining. In the next step, the ability of stem cells to differentiate into osteoblasts was evaluated by measuring alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, calcium deposition, and bone-related gene and protein expression. In the end, the expression levels of miR-20a, miR-125a, and their target genes were also investigated as positive and negative regulators in osteogenesis pathways. The results showed that the coated scaffolds with bioceramics present a more appropriate surface for cell adhesion and proliferation, as well as efficient potential in inducing osteoconduction and osteointegration compared to PCL alone and control. The PCL/HA/BG scaffold exhibited higher in vitro cell viability and bone formation compared to the other groups, which can be due to the synergistic effect of HA and BG. On the whole, this tricomponent 3D-printing scaffold has a promising prospect for bone tissue engineering applications.
Bone tissue engineering
has three components including the cell
source, growth factor, and scaffold, among which scaffold significantly
affects mass transport and supports cell proliferation, adhesion,
and growth.[1] Regular methods used to make
three-dimensional (3D) porous scaffolds are limited in accurately
controlling the architecture and internal connection of the pores.[2,3] Advanced techniques such as three-dimensional (3D) printing can
overcome many of the limitations of the traditional fabrication methods
by precisely controlling the pore structure and architecture.[4,5] 3D printing techniques commonly used in medical applications include
fused deposition modeling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), selective
laser sintering (SLS), particle binding (PB), inkjet printing (IP),
and direct ink writing (DIW).[6] Various
synthetic and natural materials are used to make bone scaffolds, like
polymers, ceramics, and even metallic foams.[7] Synthetic materials are more suitable in terms of control over the
micro and macrostructures of the scaffold, including porosity and
material composition.[8] The most common
synthetic polymers in bone tissue engineering are poly α-hydroxy
acids, which are prone to nonenzymatic degradation, due to their hydrolytically
labile ester bond.[9,10] A biocompatible polymer that
has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is poly-ε-caprolactone
(PCL).[11] PCL has a low melting point and
high crystallinity as well better workability and machinability at
normal temperatures.[12] But, the problem
is that PCL is a hydrophobic material and does not have a tendency
for cell attachment.[13,14] The most basic and important
criteria for any scaffold material are initial cell attachment and
proliferation.[15] From a cell biological
point of view, primary cells mostly need a rigid surface for cell
attachment and proliferation, which are anchorage-dependent.[16] Bioactive ceramics such as β-tricalcium
phosphate (b-TCP), hydroxyapatite (HA), bioactive glass (BG), and
calcium silicate (CS), which are similar to the bone mineral phase,
have received much clinical attention.[17] Bioactive ceramic scaffolds can interact with physiological fluids
due to the formation of HA-like layers of bones, resulting in strong
chemical bonds with the bone tissue.[18,19]Hydroxyapatite
is a bioceramic and exhibits superior biological
properties such as osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, and excessive
biocompatibility.[20,21] HA has excellent biocompatibility
due to its chemical composition, which allows the protein to attach
on its surface with strong electrostatic interaction. Because of its
high bioactivity, it reacts rapidly with organic molecules, proteins,
and essential amino acids, and effectively repairs hard tissues such
as bones and teeth.[22,23] Bioactive glasses as inorganic
bioactive materials are the most widely used synthetic materials and
are used in bone tissue engineering applications due to their superior
potential in bonding to bones and their stimulating effects on the
new bone formation.[24,25] But, they are less appropriate
in load-bearing applications because of their brittleness and low
flexibility and strength.[26] Nevertheless,
using them with polymers could increase the bioactivity and osteoconductivity
of the structure, as well as the acidic byproducts of polymer degradation
could be buffered and degradation rates could be proportional. The
addition of bioactive glasses to PCL could compensate for its inherent
hydrophobic nature and poor cell adhesion.[27]Human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hADSCs)
seem
to be the most promising for tissue engineering among adult stem cells.[28] Osteogenic differentiation of hADSCs is a complex
process, which is regulated by several factors, including microRNAs
(miRNAs). Previous research has revealed that miRNAs regulate the
stemness of cells and function negatively in the posttranscriptional
regulation level of gene expression. A large number of microRNAs were
upregulated or downregulated during osteogenic differentiation of
human adipose mesenchymal stem cells (hAMSCs). Therefore, certain
miRNAs as positive or negative regulators have been introduced in
the osteogenic differentiation of hAMSCs.[29]In this study, an easy postfabrication modification method
is introduced
to modify the 3D-printed scaffolds to make them more appropriate for
biomedical applications. Four groups of scaffolds including PCL, PCL/HA,
PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG were prepared. Then, after isolation and characterization
of hADSCs in vitro, the effect of these scaffolds
on the osteogenic differentiation potential of hADSCs was evaluated
by measuring ALP activity, total calcium, and bone-related gene and
protein expression. Furthermore, the effect of nanotomography was
also determined on the expression of involved microRNA during osteogenesis
expression.
Results and Discussion
Results
Morphological Evaluation
The surface morphologies of
the PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds were characterized
by field emission scanning electron microscopy (FeSEM). The only PCL
scaffold filament shows a smooth surface, whereas, after treatment
with nanoparticles, the nanoscale rough surface morphology was observed
for the scaffolds. The roughness is induced by the nanoparticle treatment
due to polymer degradation and erosion and may also contribute to
the hydrophilicity of scaffolds.The surface morphology studied
using SEM micrographs of PCL and surface-modified 3D-printed scaffolds
at different magnifications are shown in Figure a–d. The well-aligned layers of the
scaffolds can be seen at low magnification, which has not changed
during postmodification. The nanoparticle incorporation did not cause
the blocking of scaffold pores, which is desirable for biomedical
applications. At high magnification, bioceramic particles can be seen
on the surface of scaffolds. As seen from the micrographs, the pores
are interconnected. The results obtained by Image J software are shown
in Table .
Figure 1
Morphology
of 3D-printed scaffolds by scanning electron microscopy
(FeSEM) at two magnifications (50×, 100×) and morphology
of nanoparticles on the surface of scaffolds at two magnifications
(5.00k×, 25.0k×). (a) PCL scaffolds, (b) PCL/HA scaffolds,
(c) PCL/BG scaffolds, and (d) PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
Table 1
Topographical Feature Sizes
scaffold
min
max
average
(A) Diameter of scaffold
filaments
(mm)
PCL
0.299
0.332
0.314
PCL/HA
0.355
0.392
0.376
PCL/BG
0.310
0.342
0.323
PCL/HA/BG
0.266
0.337
0.3
(B) Pore size of scaffolds (mm)
PCL
0.288
0.397
0.350
PCL/HA
0.263
0.274
0.270
PCL/BG
0.337
0.348
0.341
PCL/HA/BG
0.255
0.484
0.350
Morphology
of 3D-printed scaffolds by scanning electron microscopy
(FeSEM) at two magnifications (50×, 100×) and morphology
of nanoparticles on the surface of scaffolds at two magnifications
(5.00k×, 25.0k×). (a) PCL scaffolds, (b) PCL/HA scaffolds,
(c) PCL/BG scaffolds, and (d) PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
Attenuated Total Reflectance-Fourier Transform
Infrared (ATR-FTIR)
Analysis
ATR-FTIR diagrams for PCL samples and PCL coated
with hydroxyapatite and bioactive glasses (PCL/HA, PCL/BG), as well
as PCL coated with both materials (PCL/HA + BG) are shown in Figure a. According to Figure a, the structural
characteristics appearing in the infrared spectrum for the four groups
are expressed as follows.
Figure 2
(a) ATR-FTIR spectra of PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG,
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
(b) Stress–strain curves of 3D-printed scaffolds. (c–f)
EDS analysis of PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds using
FeSEM.
(a) ATR-FTIR spectra of PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG,
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
(b) Stress–strain curves of 3D-printed scaffolds. (c–f)
EDS analysis of PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds using
FeSEM.
PCL Scaffold
The peaks at 2862 and
2938 cm–1 are attributed to symmetric and asymmetric
stretchings of the −CH2 groups in the polymer chain,
respectively. The prominent
peak at 1724 cm–1 indicates the stretching vibrations
of C=O groups. The peaks at 1294 and 1238 cm–1 show the asymmetric stretching vibrations of the C–O–C
groups, and the absorption peak at 1166 cm–1 is
due to its symmetric stretching vibrations. The broad peak at about
3300 cm–1 corresponds to the OH groups and the adsorbed
moisture due to the H bonds in the system.
PCL/HA Scaffold
The absorption peaks in the wavenumber
range of 1092 cm–1 and especially 1034 cm–1 are attributed to asymmetric stretching vibrations of P–O
in phosphate groups. Also, the absorption peak at 960 cm–1 is due to their symmetrical stretching vibrations. The OH groups
in the structure of HA also appear as absorption peaks at 634 cm–1 in the form of bending vibration.
PCL/BG Scaffold
The absorption peaks at 1052 and 1162
cm–1 are attributed to the asymmetric stretching
of the Si–O–Si groups. Also, the absorption peak at
870 cm–1 and the shoulder at 940 cm–1 represent nonbridging oxygen in the Si–O- structure. In addition,
an important absorption peak at 1428 cm–1 is attributed
to the carbonate groups in the structure of BG. The wide peak at 3300
cm–1 can also be attributed to the OH groups and
the adsorbed moisture due to the hydrogen bonds in the glass structure.
PCL/HA/BG
Scaffold
By comparing the infrared spectrum
of PCL coated with both HA and BG with the other three spectra, the
presence of index absorption peaks of PCL attributed to carbonyl groups
at about 1740 cm–1 and methylene groups in the range
of 2800–3000 cm–1 was observed simultaneously,
with the absorption peak at 1034 cm–1 attributed
to the phosphate groups in the HA structure and the absorption peak
due to the carbonate groups in the BG structure at a wavenumber of
1428 cm–1. Due to the simultaneous coating of PCL
with both HA and BG, the size of the peaks attributed to PCL (1740
and 3000–2800 cm–1) decreased well compared
to that of the uncoated state. Furthermore, the presence of HA, BG,
and both on the surface of scaffolds is confirmed by ATR-FTIR spectroscopy.
The presence of P and Ca in PCL/HA scaffolds, Na, Si, Ca, and P in
PCL/BG scaffolds, and also the presence of all of these elements in
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds were confirmed using EDS. Meanwhile, their proper
dispersion in the final structure was determined as shown in Figure c–f.
Compression
Test
The stress–strain curves for
the studied specimens are shown in Figure b, and the important characteristics of these
diagrams are determined and presented in Table . As can be seen, the pure PCL sample has
a yield stress of about 0.4 MPa, which indicates the mechanical change
of the sample during loading. On the addition of BG to PCL, the mechanical
behavior of the sample did not change, but its yield stress increased
substantially by more than 300%, reaching 1.32 MPa. Moreover, the
fracture toughness, which is the maximum mechanical energy that the
material can withstand before failure and is calculated by the area
below the strain–stress curve, and also the strain at break
have increased. Meanwhile, the compressive modulus and the strength
of the sample (the maximum compressive stress it can withstand before
the material breaks) are reduced in comparison to the pure polymer.
However, on the addition of HA to the pure polymer, it is observed
that the behavior of the material has changed to reach full elasticity
(absence of yield stress and plastic behavior). Also, the compressive
modulus has improved significantly compared to the pure polymer and
the compressive strength has remained almost unchanged. By simultaneously
adding BG and HA to PCL, the modulus, strength, toughness, and strain
at break are significantly reduced in comparison to the pure PCL,
but the behavior of the material becomes quite elastic.
Table 2
Mechanical Characterization of 3D-Printed
Scaffolds
sample
modulus (MPa)
yield stress (MPa)
strength
(MPa)
strain at break (%)
toughness (MJ/m3)
PCL
31.483
0.378
1.956
7.5
0.060
PCL/BG
29.688
1.320
1.951
7.6
0.074
PCL/HA
32.505
1.955
6.2
0.057
PCL/HA + BG
30.696
1.062
3.6
0.017
Cell Adhesion and Proliferation on 3D-Printed
Scaffolds
The morphology, distribution, and adhesion of hAMSCs
seeded on PCL,
PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds at days 4, 7, and 14 are presented
by FeSEM images in Figure a–l. SEM analysis revealed that the four groups of
3D-printed scaffolds served as an excellent surface for the attachment
and proliferation of hAMSCs. The cells expanded on all scaffolds to
form a cell layer and penetrated into the pore of scaffolds.
Figure 3
FeSEM images
representing hADSCs cultured on 3D-printed scaffolds
on days 4, 7, and 14. (a–c) hADSCs cultured on PCL scaffolds;
(d–f) hADSCs cultured on PCL/HA scaffolds; (g–i) ADMSCs
cultured on PCL/BG scaffolds; and (j–l) hADSCs cultured on
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
FeSEM images
representing hADSCs cultured on 3D-printed scaffolds
on days 4, 7, and 14. (a–c) hADSCs cultured on PCL scaffolds;
(d–f) hADSCs cultured on PCL/HA scaffolds; (g–i) ADMSCs
cultured on PCL/BG scaffolds; and (j–l) hADSCs cultured on
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
MTT assay was performed to evaluate
the biocompatibility of scaffolds and viability of cells on the scaffolds.
As shown in Figure a, an increasing pattern of the cell population is indicated during
the period of time, for all groups and tissue culture polystyrene
(TCPs). So, 3D-printed scaffolds did not show cytotoxicity on the
proliferation level of stem cells. But, no significant difference
was observed between different groups and TCPs as a control at the
same period.
Figure 4
(a) MTT assay of hADSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, PCL/HA/BG,
and
TCP at days 1, 4, and 7 of the cell culture. (b) DAPI staining of
the scaffolds on day 4 after the cell culture. (c) DAPI staining of
the scaffolds on day 7 after the cell culture.
(a) MTT assay of hADSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, PCL/HA/BG,
and
TCP at days 1, 4, and 7 of the cell culture. (b) DAPI staining of
the scaffolds on day 4 after the cell culture. (c) DAPI staining of
the scaffolds on day 7 after the cell culture.
DAPI Staining
According to the DAPI staining results,
which were performed on days 4 and 7 after the cell culture (Figure b,c), hAMSCs had
an excellent cell attachment on the 3D-printed scaffolds. Images showed
that a large population of hAMSCs adhered to the nanoparticle-coated
PCL scaffolds than PCL alone. Therefore, the rate of cell attachment
and viability on PCL/HA, PCL/BA, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds were higher
compared to those on the PCL scaffold.
ALP Activity
As
shown in Figure a,
a significant increase in ALP activity
was observed during the test period. On day 7, the two groups, PCL/HA/BG
and PCL/HA, showed a significant increase compared to TCPs as control,
and even PCL/HA/BG scaffolds had a significant increase compared to
PCL and PCL/BG groups. On day 14, PCL scaffolds coated with nanoparticles
indicated a significant increase in ALP activity compared to PCL alone
and TCPs. According to the results, the highest level of the enzyme
was related to day 21 of PCL/HA/BG scaffolds.
Figure 5
(a) Alkaline phosphatase
(ALP) activity of hAD-MSCs on coated and
uncoated scaffolds, and TCPs after 7, 14, and 21 days of osteogenic
differentiation. (b) Calcium content of hAD-MSCs on coated and uncoated
scaffolds, and TCPs after 7, 14, and 21 days of osteogenic differentiation.
(c–e) Relative expression of osteocalcin (OCN), osteonectin,
and ALP genes after 21 days in hAD-MSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds, and TCPs during the osteogenic process.
(a) Alkaline phosphatase
(ALP) activity of hAD-MSCs on coated and
uncoated scaffolds, and TCPs after 7, 14, and 21 days of osteogenic
differentiation. (b) Calcium content of hAD-MSCs on coated and uncoated
scaffolds, and TCPs after 7, 14, and 21 days of osteogenic differentiation.
(c–e) Relative expression of osteocalcin (OCN), osteonectin,
and ALP genes after 21 days in hAD-MSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds, and TCPs during the osteogenic process.
Calcium Content and Mineralization
The calcium content
was determined to evaluate the osteogenic differentiation in TCP,
PCL, PCL/BG, PCL/HA, and PCL/HA/BG groups at days 7, 14, and 21 (see Figure b). A comparison
of the four groups revealed a significant increase in mineralization
in all groups during osteogenic differentiation. At the three time
points, the highest calcium content was related to PCL/HA/BG, PCL/HA,
and PCL/BG groups, respectively. There was no significant difference
between PCL and TCP groups during the differentiation period. On day
7, PCL/HA/BG and PCL/HA scaffolds had a significant increase in the
calcium content in comparison to PCL/BG scaffolds. In the second week,
PCL/HA and PCL/BG groups had no significant difference, while the
PCL/HA/BG group had a significant increase compared to PCL/HA and
PCL/BG groups. On day 21, nanoparticle-coated scaffolds showed a very
significant increase compared to PCL scaffolds and TCPs. However,
there was no significant difference between them.
Gene Expression
Analysis
A real-time PCR was performed
to study the expression levels of osteoblast markers at mRNA levels.
The relative expression levels of osteocalcin, osteonectin, and ALP
genes were evaluated to clarify the osteogenic differentiation potential
of hAMSCs on the scaffolds coated with HA and BG compared to PCL alone
or the TCP group in the 21 day differentiation period. As shown in Figure c–e, there
is a significant difference in bone genes expression, osteocalcin,
osteonectin, and ALP between the 3D-printed scaffolds and TCPs. Evaluation
of graphs related to all three genes indicated that PCL/HA/BG and
PCL/HA scaffolds had a statistically significant increase compared
to control. But, there was no significant difference between other
groups. In addition, the expression of OCN in PCL/HA/BG and PCL/HA
groups was significantly higher than that of PCL alone (p < 0.05).
Immunocytochemical (ICC) Analysis
Immunocytochemistry
was performed using the osteocalcin antibody, as an osteoblast cell
marker. As shown in Figure a,b, the immunocytochemical staining revealed positive osteocalcin
expression in all groups at day 21 but in groups where cells are seeded
on 3D-printed scaffolds, we had higher expression compared to TCPs.
According to Figure a,b, the highest levels of osteocalcin were seen in PCL/HA/BG, PCL/HA,
PCL/BG, and PCL scaffolds.
Figure 6
(a) Immunofluorescence staining of hAD-MSCs
after 21 day induction
in an osteoblast differentiation medium on 3D-printed scaffolds. (b)
Diagram of immunofluorescence staining of hAD-MSCs after 21 day induction
in an osteoblast differentiation medium.
(a) Immunofluorescence staining of hAD-MSCs
after 21 day induction
in an osteoblast differentiation medium on 3D-printed scaffolds. (b)
Diagram of immunofluorescence staining of hAD-MSCs after 21 day induction
in an osteoblast differentiation medium.
miRNA and Gene Expressions
Figure a–d shows that there are different
expressions of microRNAs in the four groups of 3D-printed scaffolds
relative to each other as well as to TCPs as a control. An increasing
trend of expression of miR-20a as a positive regulator was clearly
observed in the scaffolds compared to the control from days 7 to 21.
The miR-20a expression levels were significantly upregulated during
osteogenesis of hAMSCs on the PCL/HA/BG scaffolds, and there is a
significant increase between the level of expression of miR-20a in
PCL/HA/BG scaffolds compared to other groups of scaffolds and TCPs.
miR-125a, as a negative regulator, is downregulated during osteogenesis.
The greatest decrease in the expression level of this miR was observed
in the PCL/HA/BG scaffold and subsequently in the PCL/HA scaffold
on day 21. To determine the effect of miRs as regulators of BMP signaling,
the expression levels of Smad4 and BMPR2 genes were evaluated in the
osteogenesis period. BMPR2, as a positive regulator of BMP signaling,
did not differ significantly in terms of the expression level on day
7 in the experimental groups, but there is a significant difference
between the expression level of BMPR2 in PCL/HA/BG scaffolds compared
to the control on days 14 and 21. The mRNA expression level of smad4
was upregulated after osteogenic differentiation compared with that
on day 7. As shown in Figure d, the upregulation of smad4 in PCL/HA/BG scaffolds was significantly
different compared to that of TCP on day 21.
Figure 7
Relative expressions
of (a) miR-20a, (b) BMPR2, (c) miR-125a, and
(d) Smad4 on days 7, 14, and 21 in hAD-MSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG,
and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds, and TCPs during the osteogenic process.
Relative expressions
of (a) miR-20a, (b) BMPR2, (c) miR-125a, and
(d) Smad4 on days 7, 14, and 21 in hAD-MSCs on PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG,
and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds, and TCPs during the osteogenic process.
Discussion
Tissue engineering is
a promising approach in the treatment of
lost tissues of the human body, which are not treated by the current
methods. In this regard, scaffold-based tissue engineering has been
extensively investigated.[30] Among the various
scaffold fabrication methods, 3D printing is considered a useful method
in fabricating tissue engineering scaffolds. Because of the advantages
such as a simple workflow and low price, FDM that uses filaments or
pellets made of PCL, poly (l-lactic acid) (PLLA), and other
biodegradable and biocompatible polyesters is often used to produce
the bone tissue engineering scaffold.[31] By modifying the appropriate surface of the scaffold, biologically,
cell molecules and cell-recognizable ligands can physically and chemically
interact with the surface of the scaffold.[30] Surface modification with ceramics like hydroxyapatite (HA), tri-calcium
phosphate (TCP), bioactive glass (BG), and calcium silicate (CS) as
biomaterials based on calcium, phosphate, and silicate are able to
form direct bonds with living bones after implantation. By coating
the bioceramics on the scaffold surface, this compound affects the
cells and improves osteogenesis.[32] Several
research studies have been performed on the postfabrication modification
of the scaffolds with bioceramics; for example, Bose et al., in 2018,
have reported about the effect of surface modification of 3D-printed
implants with calcium phosphate (CaP). Their findings showed that
strontium oxide and silicon oxide doped calcium phosphate-coated titanium
(Ti) porous cylinders with a nanotube film improved the early-stage
osteointegration between the host bone and the implant compared to
pure porous Ti rods.[33] Also, the improving
effects of interactions of BMP-2 and mineral-coated HAp microparticles
on osteogenesis and chondrogenesis within hMSC aggregates were assessed
by Dang et al.[34] In addition to modifying
the surface of scaffolds with bioceramics, a significant number of
studies have already been performed in developing polymer–ceramic
composites for clinical applications. Kalita and colleagues have fabricated
TCP–polypropylene composites via FDM,[35] and the scaffolds of PCL/HA/TCP composites were successfully manufactured
using FDM for bone formation by Moukbil et al.[36]The purpose of this study was to fabricate suitable
3D-printing
scaffolds for bone repair and reconstruction. In this study, we selected
PCL as the main material due to its mechanical strength and biocompatibility.[37] Mondal et al., in 2020, studied the effects
of printing at three orientations on the XY plane,
0, 45, and 90°, on the mechanical properties of PLA scaffolds.
Their findings indicated that 3D printing at an orientation of 90°
on the XY plane resulted in a scaffold with the highest
compression strength and sufficient porosity.[38] In this study, we fabricated circular four-layer scaffolds with
a diameter of 1.5 cm, and the scaffolds were designed in a lay-down
pattern of 0/90°, forming square pores. After that, a facile
postfabrication modification was done on the 3D-printed PCL scaffold
surface by coating HA, BG, and both nanoparticles. These bioceramics
were selected due to their hydrophilicity, which could promote the
hydrophilicity of the PCL matrix to improve the attachment of proteins
and cells. After preparing the scaffolds, four scaffolds (PCL, PCL/HA,
PCL/BG, PCL/HA/BG) were compared with each other in terms of different
characteristics and with TCPs (cells seeded on the plastic area) as
a control. Evaluation of 3D-printed scaffolds using FeSEM revealed
the well-aligned layers and smooth surfaces of the PCL scaffolds and
rough surfaces of scaffolds coated with nanoparticles. A porous network
with sufficient porosity and interconnected pores was seen even after
surface modification. Kumar et al. proved that 3D-printed scaffolds
with an open porous structure are more suitable compared to other
polymer scaffolds, such as foams and fibers, in facilitating uniform
cell growth through the thickness of the scaffold.[39] FTIR and EDX analysis confirmed the presence of HA, BG,
and both on the surface of PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG scaffolds,
respectively.The mesenchymal stem cells were isolated from
human adipose tissues
and characterized by flow cytometry (CD90+, CD105+, CD34–, CD45–). To our knowledge,
there are some research studies that use bioceramics in scaffold fabrication
but, in this study, we investigated the effect of surface modification
of 3D-printed PCL scaffolds with only HA and BG and composites on
the osteogenesis differentiation of hAD-MSCs. Therefore, in this research
work, the effect of fabricated scaffolds on cell attachment, proliferation,
and viability was examined at several time points after cell seeding
by FeSEM, MTT, and DAPI staining assays. SEM analysis showed excellent
attachment of cells to the surface of scaffolds. On days 7 and 14,
the cells were seen as a layer on the surface of the scaffolds, and
the newly proliferating cells communicated with each other, which
were poured into the scaffold’s pores. In scaffolds coated
with bioceramics, the interaction between the polymer, nanoparticles,
and the cells is very interesting and the cell elongation on the nanoparticles
is significant. In fact, the layer of HA and BG bioceramics improves
cell attachment and proliferation; Mondal et al., in 2020, used human
osteoblast-like MG-63 cells to investigate cell attachment and proliferation
of synthesized and HAp-modified PLA scaffolds. Their result revealed
that PLA-HAp scaffolds provided an excellent surface for cell proliferation
and attachment.[38] The nontoxicity of the
scaffolds in cell survival was confirmed by the MTT assay. DAPI is
a fluorescent stain that binds to A–T-rich regions in DNA molecules.
Therefore, after staining, the nuclei of the cells can be seen using
a fluorescence microscope. This dye can be used where the adhesion
of cells to the scaffold is considered. Comparison of images from
day 7 compared to day 4 after cell seeding showed better cell proliferation
on scaffolds that were coated with bioceramics, which is due to their
hydrophilic surfaces, compared to PCL alone. In bone tissue engineering,
the measurement of the compressive strength of the scaffold is essential.
Compressive strength is the ability of the scaffold to withstand pressure.
Mechanical test analysis indicated that compressive moduli of scaffolds
decreased with the addition of BG and increased with the addition
of HA. The compressive strength and modulus of the PCL/HA scaffold
are higher than those of the tricomponent PCL/HA/BG and PCL scaffolds.
The
values are in agreement with the mechanical properties (compressive
strength: 0.8–11 MPa; modulus: 12–140 MPa) of the human
cancellous bone.[40] In our experiment, coating
the scaffolds with BG caused a slight decrease in the mechanical strength,
while Fathi and their groups, in 2020, showed the role of the BG in
3D-printed composite scaffolds. They printed PCL/multicomponent BG
scaffolds via FDM and expressed that the addition of BG to PCL led
to improved mechanical properties.[41]The ability of osteoconductivity of scaffolds was examined through
biochemical tests. The ALP enzyme is an indicator of osteoblastic
activity, which shows the commitment of stem cells to the osteoblastic
phenotype. According to the achieved results, a significant increase
in ALP activity was observed from the first to the third week. Two
groups of scaffolds (PCL/HA/BG and PCL/HA) revealed a significant
increase compared to the TCP in the first week. It is worth mentioning
that the PCL/HA/BG scaffold showed a good increase compared to PCL
and PCL/BG groups at that point in time. In the second week, PCL scaffolds
coated with nanoparticles indicated a significant increase in ALP
activity, compared to PCL alone and TCP. But, the highest level of
ALP was related to day 21 and the PCL/HA/BG scaffolds. Karimi et al.
have shown that the amount of ALP increased during osteogenic differentiation
from day 1 to 14 and then it decreased, which means the highest amount
of enzyme activity was found at mid-differentiation.[32] But, our result indicated the highest amount of enzyme
activity on day 21, which agrees with some previous studies. Ma et
al., in 2019, fabricated the composite 3D-printed PCL scaffolds with
polyvinylacetate (PVAc) and HA to promote cytocompatibility and osteogenesis.
They also showed that the highest level of ALP activity was detected
on day 21.[42] Our results showed a significant
enhancement in the biomineralization in all groups and TCPs during
osteogenic differentiation. At all three time points, the highest
calcium content was attributed to PCL/HA/BG, PCL/HA, and PCL/BG scaffolds.
On day 21, the scaffolds coated with nanoparticles showed a very significant
increasing trend compared to the PCL and TCP, while there was no significant
difference between them. The results show that bioceramics nanoparticles
improve the process of osteogenic differentiation. Some studies confirm
this statement. For example, the role of CaP coating onto a PCL melt
electrospun scaffold was examined and it was shown that CaP coating
accelerated the osteogenic process.[43] Also,
the results of a study conducted in 2015 by Saito and their groups
exhibited that the biomineral-coated scaffolds (PCL and PLLA) have
significantly more bone in-growth in contrast to the uncoated scaffolds.[44]Immunostaining was performed to detect
the expression level of
osteocalcin on the 3D-printed scaffolds and control on day 21. Osteocalcin
is commonly produced by osteoblasts as a marker of osteoblastic transformation.
The highest level of osteocalcin expression was determined in PCL/HA/BG,
PCL/HA, PCL/BG, PCL scaffolds. A higher expression level of osteocalcin
in the PCL/HA/BG scaffold illustrated that the tricomponent scaffold
is more successful in osteogenesis. To take a closer look at the osteogenic
behavior of hAMSCs, the expression of three important bone-related
genes was also investigated in the TCP groups and 3D-printed scaffolds.
Osteocalcin and osteonectin play an important role in the mineralization
and initial nucleation of hydroxyapatite.[45] Osteonectin is a glycoprotein that binds Ca2+ and regulates
the initial stages of crystal growth.[46] As demonstrated in this study, hydroxyapatite with bioactive glasses
or only in PCL scaffolds stimulates the expression of osteocalcin
and increased biomineralization. A similar result was obtained with
the ICC assay. The expressions of osteonectin in PCL/HA/BG and PCL/HA
groups were significantly higher than that in only PCL. ALP is a group
of enzymes that hydrolyze a variety of monophosphate esters at a high
pH level, and they have been considered as an early and medium marker
of osteogenesis.[47] In the case of ALP,
the three-substance scaffolds (PCL/HA/BG) and two-substance scaffolds
(PCL/HA) demonstrated better results in ALP expression. Meanwhile,
the expression levels of all three osteogenic genes in the 3D-printed
scaffolds were higher than in TCPs as a control. Dan et al. showed
that a caP-PCL scaffold promotes bone formation within the periodontal
defect.[48]Furthermore, the nanotopography
effect of 3D-printed scaffolds
on related osteoblast microRNAs (miR-20a, miR-125a) and their effective
genes (smad4, BMPR2) in BMP signaling was examined by qPCR. Zhang
et al. showed that the expression of endogenous miR-20a was increased
in the osteogenic differentiation period. Their results indicated
that miR-20a promoted osteogenic differentiation by the upregulation
of BMP/Runx2 signaling. Bioinformatics analysis, which they performed,
predicted that PPARy, Bambi, and Crim1 would be targets
of miR-20a. PPARy is a negative regulator for BMP/Runx2
signaling, and Bambi and Crim1 are antagonists for BMP signaling.
Bambi is an inhibitor for BMP receptors and a target gene for miR-20a.[49] Thus, inhibition of Bambi by miR-20a causes
upregulation of BMP receptors. The results obtained in this study
have shown increased expression levels of miR-20a and BMPR2 from the
first week to the third week and the highest level related to the
cells seeded on the PCL/HA/BG scaffolds. The miR-125 family includes
miR-125a and miR-125b, which are significantly downregulated during
osteogenic differentiation in human adipose-derived stem cells.[50] Several studies revealed that miR-125a negatively
regulates osteoblastic differentiation of hAMSCs by targeting smad4.[51,52] So, we expected to see upregulation of smad4 and downregulation
of miR-125a in the osteoblastic differentiation period. According
to the diagram, the upregulation of smad4 in 3D-printing scaffolds,
especially PCL/HA/BG scaffolds compared to control was shown, and
also the downregulation of miR-125a was indicated in fabricated scaffolds
compared to TCPs. In a similar study, the effect of nanotopography
of electrospun PLLA on the noncoding RNA network to osteogenic differentiation
was evaluated.[53] The results of the nanotopography
effect on the expression of positive and negative regulatory microRNAs
on osteogenesis confirmed that the 3D-printed PCL/HA/BG scaffold is
suitable for bone regeneration.
Conclusions
A
suitable scaffold must be able to support excellent cell attachment
and proliferation on its surface. We have successfully fabricated
3D-printed scaffolds (90° orientation) with adequate porosity.
Furthermore, surface modification on the scaffolds was performed using
HA and BG bioceramics. The analysis of the results revealed that surface
modification 3D-printed scaffolds effectively improved proliferation
and osteogenic differentiation of stem cells. The interaction of HA
and BG and both nanoparticles on the PCL scaffold surface greatly
affect cell attachment and facilitate cellular activity. The chemical,
biological, and molecular experiments indicated that the presence
of HA/BG, HA, and BG bioceramics, respectively, enhance the process
of osteogenic differentiation on the 3D-printed scaffolds. Finally,
it can be concluded that the competitive PCL/HA/BG scaffold can be
a promising candidate for application in bone tissue engineering.
Materials
and Methods
Materials
Polycaprolactone (PCL, Mn = 80 000, Sigma-Aldrich), hydroxyapatite (HA,
NikCeram Razi, Iran), bioactive glass (BG, NikCeram Razi, Iran), and
Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM, Gibco) were
used in the experiments and obtained as indicated.
3D Printing
In this paper, a specific 3D printer (Omid
Afarinan Mohandesi Ayande, BioFabX2, Iran) and its software
(Repetier Host V2.1.3, 2011_2018) were used to fabricate 3D porous
scaffolds by the FDM method. The 3D printer melts the polymer pellets
to lay the polymer in a layer-by-layer fashion to fabricate the scaffold
with controlled pore dimensions in the scaffold. Circular four-layer
scaffolds with a diameter of 1.5 cm were designed. The scaffolds were
designed in a lay-down pattern of 0/90°, forming square pores.
All scaffolds were fabricated using the same parameters: 0.5 mm diameter
nozzle, a layer thickness of 0.2 mm, a distance of 0.3 mm between
the two strings, a temperature of 110, and a speed of 2 mm/s. Disc
scaffolds of 15(D)_0.8(H) mm for in vitro cell cultures (Figure a) and column scaffolds
of 6(D)_12(H) mm for mechanical tests were fabricated.
Postfabrication
Modification
To increase the hydrophilicity
of the surface of PCL scaffolds, plasma treatment was performed using
a low-frequency plasma generator at 90 GHz, with a cylindrical quartz
reactor (Diener Electronics, Nagold, Germany). Pure oxygen gas was
conducted into the reaction chamber at 0.4 mbar pressure, followed
by ignition of glow discharge for 3 min. After preparation of 1 mg/mL
solution, HA and BG particles in deionized water were placed in an
ultrasonic bath for 20 min at 37 °C for good dispersion of microparticles.
Then, plasma-treated scaffolds were immersed in HA, BG, and HA/BG
solutions to deposit microparticles on the surface of scaffolds overnight.
The scaffolds were washed well with deionized water and dried under
vacuum conditions. After surface modification, we prepared four groups
of scaffolds: PCL, PCL/HA, PCL/BG, and PCL/HA/BG. The scaffolds were
sterilized using UV and ethanol before using them for experiments.
Characterization of Scaffolds
To characterize the surface
morphology of scaffolds, in the first step, samples were visualized
using a scanning electron microscope (FeSEM, Mira3, Tescan, Czech
Republic) according to our previously reported method.[54] The topographical feature size was measured
using image analysis software (Image J, NIH). In the next step, to
determine the surface chemical structure of the scaffolds and to ensure
that the HA and BG nanoparticles are coated on the surface of the
scaffolds, attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared
(ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy (PerkinElmer) was performed. In addition,
the mechanical properties of the fabricated scaffolds were determined
using a universal testing machine (SANTAM, Iran) according to our
previously reported method.[55]
Energy-Dispersive
X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS)
Due to the
fact that hydroxyapatite contains P and Ca and also bioactive glasses
contain Si and Na, which are not present in PCL, elemental analyses
were performed using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) to
identify the presence of HA and BG on the surface of scaffolds. The
samples were coated with gold and then analyzed with a scanning electron
microscope (FeSEM, Mira3, Tescan, Czech Republic).
FeSEM: Cell
Morphology and Adhesion
To study the attachment
and behavior of 3D-printed scaffolds, isolated and characterized hAMSCs
(see Supporting Information 1) were seeded
with 104 cells/cm2. At 4, 7, and 14 days, the
cell/scaffold constructs were fixed with 2.5% (w/v) glutaraldehyde
for an hour and then rinsed thoroughly with phosphate buffered saline
(PBS). Afterward, they were dehydrated through a series of increasing
gradients of ethanol and dried under vacuum conditions. The constructs
were coated with gold (20 A) and observed using a scanning electron
microscope (FEI ESEM Quanta 200) at an accelerating voltage of 25
kV.
Scaffold Biocompatibility Assay
The cytotoxicity of
the 3D-printed scaffolds on the seeded cells compared with tissue
culture polystyrene (TCPs) as control was evaluated using MTT assay
on days 1, 4, and 7. Sterilized scaffolds were placed in 24-well culture
plates, seeded with 104 cells/cm2, incubated
at 37 °C in 5% CO2. At required times, samples were
incubated with MTT solution (5 mg/mL in DMEM) for 3 h. Afterward,
the supernatant was removed and scaffolds were placed in 200 mL of
dimethyl sulfoxide (Merck) and vortexed for 8 min to dissolve the
dark-blue intracellular formazan crystals. In the end, the absorption
of the purple solution was read via a spectrophotometer (Biotek Instrument)
at a wavelength of 570 nm. Cell adhesion on the 3D-printed scaffolds
was studied using DAPI staining. In this method, hAMSCs at a density
of 104 cells/mL were seeded onto each scaffold in a 24-well
plate, cultured in a medium (DMEM, 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), %1
Pen/Sterp) and incubated at 37 °C and 5% CO2. After
4 and 7 days of incubation, the samples were washed two times with
PBS and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (Sigma) for 45 min. Then, paraformaldehyde
was removed, followed by washing with PBS. The samples were then stained
with 50 μL of DAPI and incubated for 5 min at room temperature.
To remove excess and unbound DAPI, they were washed with PBS. At the
end, the cells were observed using a fluorescence microscope (LABOMED).
Osteogenic Differentiation
The osteosupportive capacity
of the fabricated scaffolds was evaluated using the culture of hAMSCs
with a cell density of 2 × 104 cells/cm2 in an osteogenic medium containing DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS,
dexamethasone, β-glycerophosphate, and ascorbic acid for 21
days.
Alkaline Phosphatase Activity and Calcium Content Assay
Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity was investigated on days 7, 14,
and 21 during osteogenic differentiation. Total protein was extracted
from cells cultured on TCP, coated and uncoated scaffolds, using 200
μL of radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) lysis buffer. For
sedimentation of cell debris, the lysate was shaken and centrifuged
at 4 °C and 15 000g for 15 min. Then,
the supernatant containing the total proteins was collected and ALP
activity was assessed with the ALP assay kit (Pars Azmun, Iran). Eventually,
the activity of the enzyme (IU/L) was normalized against the total
protein (mg/dL). The amount of deposited calcium was measured during
osteogenic induction on scaffolds and also TCPs as a control, using
the cresolphthalein complexone method on days 7, 14, and 21. At first,
for calcium extraction, all groups were homogenized in 0.6 N HCl (Merck,
Germany) and shaken at 4 °C for 1 h. Next, the calcium content
was measured using the calcium content kit protocol (Pars Azmoon,
Iran), and the optical density (OD) of samples was measured at a wavelength
of 570 nm in a microplate reader (Biotek Instruments). The calcium
contents of samples were obtained from the standard curve of OD and
a serial dilution of calcium concentrations.
Quantitative Real-Time
RT-PCR
To detect the expression
of bone-related genes in stem cells cultured on 3D-printed coated
and noncoated scaffolds, compared to controls, a real-time PCR was
carried out at day 21 postinduction. So, the expression of three genes,
osteocalcin, osteonectin, and ALP, was investigated at the transcript
level. Briefly, RNA was extracted from cell cultures using the extraction
buffer RNA (Bonbiotech, Iran), according to the manufacturer’s
instruction. Then, cDNA synthesis was performed using the cDNA synthesis
kit (Bonbiotech, Iran). For quantitative real-time PCR, we used 6.5
μL of Syber Green qPCR Master Mix 2× (Bonbiotech, Iran),
1 μL of specific forward and backward primers, 1 μL of
cDNA, and ROX Dye in accordance with the following program at 95 °C
for 1 cycle and 2 min, 5 s at 95 °C for 40 cycles, and 30 s at
60 °C for 40 cycles. The specificity of the signals was confirmed
by evaluating the melting curve of each gene. The relative expression
of target genes were determined using the ΔΔCT method and REST 2009. Target genes were normalized against
the B2-microglobulin gene as the internal control. The primer sequences
used in qRT-PCR are presented in Table .
Table 3
Sequences of Primer Pairs Used for
Quantitative Real-Time PCR
gene name
sequence
ALP
GCACCTGCCTTACTAACTC
AGACACCCATCCCATCTC
osteocalcin
(OSC)
GCAAAGGTGCAGCCTTTGTG
GGCTCCCAGCCATTGATACAG
osteonectin
(OSN)
AGGTATCTGTGGGAGCTAATC
ATTGCTGCACACCTTCTC
β-2-microglobulin
(β 2M)
TGGAAAGAAGATACCAAATATCGA
GATGATTCAGAGCTCCATAGAGCT
Immunocytochemistry (ICC)
The immunocytochemistry
(ICC)
technique was performed to detect the expression levels of osteocalcin
on the 3D-printed scaffolds. For this purpose, after being in osteogenic
culture for 21 days, the cell suspension was cultured on sterile gelatin
lamellae. After 24 h, it was washed with PBS and fixed at 4 °C
for 20 min with 4% paraformaldehyde. Lamellae were incubated in 2
N HCL for 20 min at room temperature, after washing with PBS. Next,
the lamellae were exposed to 0.3% Triton X-100 for 30 min (Triton-permeable
cell membrane to antibodies). Afterward, 10% goat serum was added
to the cells for half an hour (goat serum proteins cause nonspecific
antigen sites to be coated and prevent a nonspecific reaction). Cells
were then incubated overnight with primary antibodies; anti-osteocalcin
(mouse anti-human, Santa Cruz) at a 1:100 (PBS) dilution at 4 °C.
They were then washed twice with PBS and exposed to conjugated secondary
antibodies (rabbit anti-mouse IgG-FITC, Santa Cruz) for 60 min at
a 1:200 (PBS) dilution and 37 °C in the dark. After three times
washing with PBS, DAPI was used to stain the nuclei and then examined
with a fluorescence microscope (LABOMED).
MicroRNAs and Target Genes
In this section, based on
previous studies, two microRNAs, miR-20a and miR-125a, and two related
genes, Smad4 and BMPR2, which are effective in osteogenic differentiation
pathways, were selected and their expression levels in the four groups
of 3D printing scaffolds using quantitative real-time PCR in accordance
with the above instruction were evaluated and compared at the days
7, 14, and 21 during osteogenic differentiation. The sequences of
the primers are presented in Table , and U6 was used as an internal control.
Table 4
Sequences of Primer Pairs Used for
Quantitative Real-Time PCR
GTC GTA TGC AGA GCA GGG TCC GAG GTA
TTC GCA CTG CAT ACG ACT
CAC AG
hsa-miR-125a-F
TCCCTGAGACCCTTTAAC
h-BMPR2-F
AGAGACCCAAGTTCCCAGAAGC
h-BMPR2-R
CCTTTCCTCAGCACACTGTGCA
h-SMAD4-F
TTGGATGGACGACTTCAGG
h-SMAD4-R
CACTAACATACTTGGAGCATTAC
Statistical Analysis
Each experiment
was conducted
three times. The results were analyzed with GraphPad software. One-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) was selected to compare the results.
A P-value < 0.05 was considered as the level of
significance.
Authors: Hongxia Dan; Cédryck Vaquette; Anthony G Fisher; Stephen M Hamlet; Yin Xiao; Dietmar W Hutmacher; Saso Ivanovski Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Qingqiang Yao; Bo Wei; Yang Guo; Chengzhe Jin; Xiaotao Du; Chao Yan; Junwei Yan; Wenhao Hu; Yan Xu; Zhi Zhou; Yijin Wang; Liming Wang Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2015-01-18 Impact factor: 3.896