| Literature DB >> 35359987 |
Emine Kahraman1,2,3, Ricardo Ribeiro1,2, Meriem Lamghari1,2, Estrela Neto1,2.
Abstract
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a painful and disabling musculoskeletal disorder, with a large impact on the global population, resulting in several limitations on daily activities. In OA, inflammation is frequent and mainly controlled through inflammatory cytokines released by immune cells. These outbalanced inflammatory cytokines cause cartilage extracellular matrix (ECM) degradation and possible growth of neuronal fibers into subchondral bone triggering pain. Even though pain is the major symptom of musculoskeletal diseases, there are still no effective treatments to counteract it and the mechanisms behind these pathologies are not fully understood. Thus, there is an urgent need to establish reliable models for assessing the molecular mechanisms and consequently new therapeutic targets. Models have been established to support this research field by providing reliable tools to replicate the joint tissue in vitro. Studies firstly started with simple 2D culture setups, followed by 3D culture focusing mainly on cell-cell interactions to mimic healthy and inflamed cartilage. Cellular approaches were improved by scaffold-based strategies to enhance cell-matrix interactions as well as contribute to developing mechanically more stable in vitro models. The progression of the cartilage tissue engineering would then profit from the integration of 3D bioprinting technologies as these provide 3D constructs with versatile structural arrangements of the 3D constructs. The upgrade of the available tools with dynamic conditions was then achieved using bioreactors and fluid systems. Finally, the organ-on-a-chip encloses all the state of the art on cartilage tissue engineering by incorporation of different microenvironments, cells and stimuli and pave the way to potentially simulate crucial biological, chemical, and mechanical features of arthritic joint. In this review, we describe the several available tools ranging from simple cartilage pellets to complex organ-on-a-chip platforms, including 3D tissue-engineered constructs and bioprinting tools. Moreover, we provide a fruitful discussion on the possible upgrades to enhance the in vitro systems making them more robust regarding the physiological and pathological modeling of the joint tissue/OA.Entities:
Keywords: 3D bioprinting; Cartilage; joint-on-a-chip; microfluidic; osteoarthritis; tissue engineering
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35359987 PMCID: PMC8960235 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.802440
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1Illustration of the joint microenvironment on both healthy (left) and inflamed (right) conditions. Healthy cartilage is composed of well-defined layers of distinct zones as articular bone, cartilage layer, meniscus, synovial membrane and synovium. Nerve fibers and blood vessels are present in the periosteum, cortical bone and bone marrow, in relatively low density. In degenerative cartilage, the zones comprising the joint tissue are degraded and neuronal fibers are present showing higher density. The increased amount of blood vessels, sensory and sympathetic nerve fibers is into cartilage zone might be due to the pro-inflammatory environment and upregulation of neurotrophic factors as Netrin-1 and nerve growth factor (NGF) expression. These sensory nerve fibers are responsible for conducting the noxious stimuli to the spinal cord to be further processed by the central nervous system leading to the pain processing.
Advantages and disadvantages of different cell types used in joint tissue engineering.
| Cell Types | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| Autologous Chondrocytes ( | - Low immune-rejection risk | - Donor site variability |
| Mesenchymal stem cells ( | - Easy to isolate | - Potential risk for tumorigenesis. |
| Human embryonic stem cells ( | - Can be differentiated into any cell types derived from ectoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm | - High risk for tumorigenicity and teratoma |
| Induced-pluripotent stem cells ( | - Easy cell source. | - Purification of cells into chondrocytes |
OA, osteoarthritis.
Examples of currently available scaffold-based in vitro models for cartilage tissue applications.
| Material | Joint tissue model | Cell type | Crosslinking method | Fabrication technique | Major observations/findings | Drawbacks | Refs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Properties | |||||||
| Gelatine: GelMA | Viscous, stiff | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | Higher viscosity promotes the retaining of chondrogenic phenotype of chondrocytes, while low viscosity encourages cell proliferation | No data presented regarding localization of ECM proteins | ( |
| Gelatine: GelMA | Young’s modulus: from 3.8~ to 29.9~ kPa | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | The influence of hydrogel stiffness was investigated by altering methacrylate ratio of gelatine | Longer culture time is needed | ( |
| PEGDA/GelMA | Stiffness: from 1.6 kPa to 25 kPa | Cartilage | Mesenchymal stem cells | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | Differentiation of MSCs into chondrocytes was improved with higher stiffness hydrogels | No data presented regarding localization of ECM proteins | ( |
| GelMA/HAMA | Viscosity >300 Pa and it inversely proportional with applied shear stress | Cartilage | Adipose stem cells | Photocrosslinking | Extrusion-based bioprinting | Provides handheld printing of scaffolds with/without cells on the wound site during surgery | Not possible to print less than 1mm sized defects | ( |
| GelMA & | Viscous, | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Photocrosslinking | Stereolithographic bioprinting | Higher cell density encapsulated in GelMA hydrogels showed more chondrogenic phenotype | Properties of HA such as solution viscosity that varies by temperature affected cell viability and hydrogel itself showed autofluorescence during imaging process. | ( |
| Cellulose/Alginate | Water content: 97.50% (w/v) | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Chemical crosslinking | Droplet based bioprinting (micro valve) | High cell viability (~86%) of chondrocytes after 7 days of culture; Mechanically stable & biocompatible bioink establishment | Does not include any assay that explored the chondrogenic phenotype of cells | ( |
| Silk−Gelatine | Gel-to-sol phase: 31°C | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Crosslinker-free | Extrusion-based bioprinting | Biocompatible bioink for both | Longer culture time is needed | ( |
| GelMA/HAMA | Compressive modulus is divergent with gelatine, PI type; higher using bovine sourced gelatine and Irgacure | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | Different gelatine sources and PI types were investigated. | More evidence is needed to conclude their findings | ( |
| GelMA & HAMA | Compressive modulus: GelMA:26kPa; HAMA:96kPa; | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting into a Teflon mold covered with glass | Different polymers were evaluated regarding mechanical properties and chondrogenic differentiation. | Actin filament staining revealed that morphology of chondrocytes was not round shaped as described in literature | ( |
| GelMA modified with cartilage-derived | GelMA modified with CDM has higher compressive modulus comparing to only GelMA (range between ~120-175kPa) | Osteochondral | Chondrocytes & Multipotent stromal cells | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | CDM particles were found to stimulate the formation of a cartilage template. | Cell viability assay and experimental set up were tested with different cell densities | ( |
| Alginate | No information regarding mechanical properties of scaffold | Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Chemical crosslinking | Micropipetting using syringe pump | Highly organized 3D alginate scaffolds were produced by droplet-based microfluidic device. | Expression of chondrogenic ECM markers started to decrease after 4 weeks of culture, therefore more animal study is needed | ( |
| Fibrin, functionalized with TGF-β3 | More viscous comparing to the control group | Cartilage | Stromal cells | Chemical crosslinking | Simple pipetting |
| Further studies are needed to understand how particle size of ECM proteins affects chondrogenesis. | ( |
| Collagen | Biocompatible, | Cartilage | Osteoarthritic chondrocytes | Chemical crosslinking | Water-in-oil emulsion method | Osteoarthritic chondrocytes encapsulated in the 3D collagen microsphere better recapitulated the OA phenotypes comparing to the pellet culture. | The | ( |
| PEG | Biocompatible, | Cartilage | Chondrocytes and Macrophages | Photocrosslinking | Simple pipetting | Two cell types were encapsulated separately but cultured in the same medium in a Transwell system to understand the crosstalk between cartilage and macrophages in OA. | No data presented regarding localization of ECM proteins | ( |
GelMA, Gelatine-methacryloylate; kPa, kilo Pascal; ECM, extracellular matrix; °C, Celsius; GAG, Glycosaminoglycan; Col-II, Collagen-II; PEGDA, Poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate; MSCs, mesenchymal stem cells; Pa, Pascal; HAMA, hyaluronic acid methacrylate; HÁ, hyaluronic acid; C/A, Cellulose/Alginate; w/weight/volume; PI, photo initiator; B-IC, bovine Irgacure; RT-PCR, real time polymerase chain reaction; MMP-13, matrix metalloproteinase; PRG4, Proteoglycan 4; CDM, cartilage-derived matrix; 3D, 3-dimensional; TGF-β3, transforming growth factor beta-3; IL-1β, Interleukin-1 beta; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-alpha.
Figure 2Schematic representation of the timeline evolution of different in vitro models for cartilage tissue engineering strategies. Increasing complexity can be observed starting from 2D simple culture, 3D pellets models, bioreactors and bioprinting applications into more multifaceted platforms as microfluidic models that comprised of joint-on-chip components (synovium, cartilage, immune, osteochondral, endothelium, neuronal and meniscus unit) and how these components match with the native joint environment.
Advantages and disadvantages of currently available in vitro models.
| Current | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| 2D Monolayer culture ( | - High reproducibility | - Results with dedifferentiation of chondrocytes |
| 3D Cell-based ( | - Higher chondrogenic capacity than 2D models | - Ignores cell-matrix interactions |
| 3D Scaffold-based ( | - Offers a native like microenvironment | - Low mechanical properties |
| Tissue Explants ( | - Cells are maintained in their native microenvironment | - Limited number of donors. |
| Bioreactors ( | - Enable cultures cells in a controlled environment | - Do not provide fully dynamic platforms |
| Microfluidics ( | - Physiologically relevant | - May result with uncontrolled fluidic flow due to bubbles in the channels |
2D, 2-dimensional; 3D, 3-dimensional.
Figure 3Examples of some of the currently available microfluidic models. (A, B) Mechanically stimulated microfluidic models. (A) i: schematic representation of the microfluidic platform to mimic strain compression; ii: lateral cross section of the device; iii: movement of PDMS membrane under different mechanical compressions. [Adapted from (104)] (B) i: Design of the microfluidic platform includes PDMS membrane to create mechanical pressure; ii: light microscopy images of how PDMS membrane moves under different pressures; iii: quantitative results of displacement level of the membrane related to applied pressure [Adapted from (106)]. (C–E) Biochemically stimulated microfluidic models. (C) Design of the osteochondral microfluidic model that includes encapsulated IPSCs in order to form bone and cartilage tissue [Adapted from (107)]. (D) Design of the organoid-based joint-on-a-chip co-culture system that includes chondral and synovial organoids [Adapted from (108)]. (E) i: Real picture of the cartilage-on-chip model and overview of the encapsulated chondrocytes in a hydrogel scaffold; ii: stimulation for the diffusion of biomolecules through circular chamber and channel (Adapted from (109). (F) Components of the synovium-on-chip model and schematic representation of the developed joint microenvironment [Adapted from (110)].
Currently developed joint-on-chip models.
| Joint model | Cell types | Stimulation type | 3D ECM material | Drug Testing | Major observations | Refs | Drawback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rheumatoid Arthritis | FLSs & BMSCs | Biochemical stimulation | No | Celastrol | Allows to mimic FLS migration and invasion-mediated bone erosion in RA. | ( | No data presented regarding the pain caused by Musculoskeletal disorders |
| Rheumatoid Arthritis | FLSs & chondrocytes | Biochemical stimulation | Matrigel for FLSs | No | First established chip-based chondro-synovial dual organoid model | ( | |
| Cartilage | Chondrocytes | Mechanical stimulation | Fibrin/Hyaluronic acid | No | The engineered construct has similar Young modulus and capability to express GAG, Safranin and Col-II proteins to native cartilage tissue | ( | |
| Osteoarthritis | Chondrocytes | Mechanical stimulation | Agarose | No | The device was separated through PDMS membrane that allows to create mechanical stimulation on chondrocytes. Chondrocytes cultured closer to hyperphysiological stimulation side have less cell viability. More data is needed on chondrogenic behaviour under mechanical stimulation | ( | |
| Osteoarthritis | Chondrocytes | Mechanical stimulation | PEG | Il1Ra & R2apamycin | Successful recapitulation of mechanical stimuli on OA patients | ( | |
| Osteochondral | IPSCs | Biochemical stimulation | GelMA | Celecoxib | Bone is critical to promote cartilage hypertrophy in the joint. | ( | |
| Osteoarthritis | Chondrocytes | Biochemical stimulation | Fibrin | Steroid treatment (triamcinolone) | Healthy joint model characterized through expression of SOX9, Col-II, Aggrecan | ( | |
| Cartilage & Synovium | FLSs & chondrocyte & HUVECs | Biochemical & Mechanical stimulation | Fibrin | No | Successful extravasation of monocytes and identification of activated macrophages and neutrophils from the engineered OA construct | ( |
3D, 3-dimensional; ECM, extracellular matrix; FLS, fibroblast-like synoviocytes; BMSCs, bone marrow stem cells; RA, Rheumatoid Arthritis; GAG, Glycosaminoglycan; Col-II, Collagen-II; PDMS, Polydimethylsiloxane; PEG, Poly-(ethylene glycol); Il1Ra, Interleukin 1 rapamycin; IPSCs, Induced pluripotent stem cells; GelMA, Gelatine-methacryloylate; SOX9, SRY-Box Transcription Factor 9; HUVECs, Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cells; OA, Osteoarthritis.