| Literature DB >> 35269885 |
Jina Ryu1, Mats Brittberg2,3, Bomi Nam1, Jinyeong Chae1, Minju Kim1, Yhan Colon Iban4, Martin Magneli4,5,6, Eiji Takahashi4,5,7, Bharti Khurana8, Charles R Bragdon4,5.
Abstract
Cartilage lesions are difficult to repair due to low vascular distribution and may progress into osteoarthritis. Despite numerous attempts in the past, there is no proven method to regenerate hyaline cartilage. The purpose of this study was to investigate the ability to use a 3D printed biomatrix to repair a critical size femoral chondral defect using a canine weight-bearing model. The biomatrix was comprised of human costal-derived cartilage powder, micronized adipose tissue, and fibrin glue. Bilateral femoral condyle defects were treated on 12 mature beagles staged 12 weeks apart. Four groups, one control and three experimental, were used. Animals were euthanized at 32 weeks to collect samples. Significant differences between control and experimental groups were found in both regeneration pattern and tissue composition. In results, we observed that the experimental group with the treatment with cartilage powder and adipose tissue alleviated the inflammatory response. Moreover, it was found that the MOCART score was higher, and cartilage repair was more organized than in the other groups, suggesting that a combination of cartilage powder and adipose tissue has the potential to repair cartilage with a similarity to normal cartilage. Microscopically, there was a well-defined cartilage-like structure in which the mid junction below the surface layer was surrounded by a matrix composed of collagen type I, II, and proteoglycans. MRI examination revealed significant reduction of the inflammation level and progression of a cartilage-like growth in the experimental group. This canine study suggests a promising new surgical treatment for cartilage lesions.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; bioink; cartilage; extracellular matrix; osteoarthritis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35269885 PMCID: PMC8910734 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23052743
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Generation of osteochondral defects in canine knee joints. (A) The illustration of canine cartilage defect models. Cartilage defects were created using a 6 mm bone punch on medial femoral condyles bilaterally. (B) 3D bioprinter (Dr. INVIVO) used in this study to print the matrix. (C) The printed matrix was implanted on the defect.
Figure 2Gross appearance of the femoral cartilages. (A) The appearance of the cartilages after bilateral 3D-printed matrix implantation procedure performed on 12 male beagle dogs. The circle indicates a defect area with a diameter of 6 mm in each group. (B) The appearance of the ingrowth tissue at 20 weeks in LCCM/MA-ECM group was distinctly different than the control group, having a glistening white solid appearance similar to the surrounding normal cartilage. Lamellar structures can be seen in the new tissue, and there is good incorporation of the tissue at the margins of the defect. Consolidation of the islands of tissue appears to continue. The few areas of red are subsurface and represent area of higher translucency, revealing the subchondral tissue.
Figure 3Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) analysis of MMP-3 (A) and -9 (B) expressions in serum. The blood samples were centrifuged for serum preparation and cryopreserved at −80 °C until analysis. Serum MMP-3 and -9 were measured by ELISA. Bar graphs describe the expression as mean ± SEM (standard error of the mean); n = 2–3 dogs per group. Note that significant difference between MA-ECM containing groups and non-containing groups. Student t-test with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Figure 4Time-lapse assessment of chondral changes using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MOCART scoring. (A) Representative MRI images on weeks 20 and 32. Note that yellow arrows indicate osteochondral alteration among groups. Interestingly, the defect area has been repaired with clear chondral margins from week 20 in LCCM/MA-ECM group. (B) The graph shows time-lapse MOCART scores at weeks 2, 4, 12, 20, and 32. n = 2–3 dogs per group.
Figure 5Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining analysis of knee articular cartilages. (A) Representative H&E stained images of cartilage on weeks 20 (right knee) and 32 (left knee) in each group. Note that denser cell distributions in MA-ECM and LCCM/MA-ECM groups compared to the other groups. (B) H&E stained images of normal cartilage. Black arrows: margins of the osteochondral defect area; black dotted rectangle: low power view (40×) of the area within the rectangle in the right panel (100×). Scale bars = 500 μm.
ICRS visual histological scores calculated under microscopy.
| Group | Feature(s) | Defect | LCCM | MA-ECM | LCCM/MA-ECM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Week 20 | Surface (0–3) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Matrix (0–3) | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| Cell distribution (0–3) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | |
| Cell viability (0–3) | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | |
| Subchondral bone (0–3) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Cartilage mineralization (0–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| Total score(s) | 11 | 12 | 14 | 14 | |
| Week 32 | Surface (0–3) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Matrix (0–3) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | |
| Cell distribution (0–3) | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Cell viability (0–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| Subchondral bone (0–3) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Cartilage mineralization (0–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| Total score(s) | 10 | 15 | 15 | 16 |
Figure 6Evaluation of safranin-O (staining) and type 1, 2 collagen (IHC) by light microscopy. 40× representative images result among defect (negative control) and experimental groups of safranin-O (A), type 1 collagen—COL1A1 (B), type 2 collagen—COL2A1 (C) on weeks 20 and 32. Black triangles indicate the margin of chondral defects. Note that intense stain of safranin-O and type 1 collagen in LCCM/MA-ECM group on week 32. Scale bars = 500 um.
The composition of the 3D printed matrix for each group. Defect only group served as a negative control and Exp 1–3 served as the experimental groups. FU = Follow Up.
| Group(s) | LCCM | MA-ECM | Study Duration | Number of Animals | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | − | − | (Right knee) | (Left knee) | 3 |
| Exp 1. | + | − | 3 | ||
| Exp 2. | − | + | 3 | ||
| Exp 3. | + | + | 3 | ||