| Literature DB >> 36061442 |
Jiangang Zhang1, Huiyu Yang2, Jiaming Wu2, Dingyue Zhang1, Yu Wang2, Jiliang Zhai3.
Abstract
Central nervous system (CNS) diseases have been a growing threat to the health of humanity, emphasizing the urgent need of exploring the pathogenesis and therapeutic approaches of various CNS diseases. Primary neurons are directly obtained from animals or humans, which have wide applications including disease modeling, mechanism exploration and drug development. However, traditional two-dimensional (2D) monoculture cannot resemble the native microenvironment of CNS. With the increasing understanding of the complexity of the CNS and the remarkable development of novel biomaterials, in vitro models have experienced great innovation from 2D monoculture toward three-dimensional (3D) multicellular culture. The scope of this review includes the progress of various in vitro models of primary neurons in recent years to provide a holistic view of the modalities and applications of primary neuron models and how they have been connected with the revolution of biofabrication techniques. Special attention has been paid to the interaction between primary neurons and biomaterials. First, a brief introduction on the history of CNS modeling and primary neuron culture was conducted. Next, detailed progress in novel in vitro models were discussed ranging from 2D culture, ex vivo model, spheroid, scaffold-based model, 3D bioprinting model, and microfluidic chip. Modalities, applications, advantages, and limitations of the aforementioned models were described separately. Finally, we explored future prospects, providing new insights into how basic science research methodologies have advanced our understanding of the CNS, and highlighted some future directions of primary neuron culture in the next few decades.Entities:
Keywords: biomaterial; bioprinting; in vitro model; microfluidic chip; primary neuron; scaffold
Year: 2022 PMID: 36061442 PMCID: PMC9428288 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.953031
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
FIGURE 1Schematic diagram of in vitro models of primary neurons illustrating features of each model.
FIGURE 2Fabrication techniques of scaffold for primary neuron culture. (A) Hydrogel scaffolds. [(A), i] Schematic illustration of crosslinking of modified polymers. [(A), ii] Image of hydrogel scaffold (Hsu et al., 2019). (B) Porous scaffolds. [(B), i] Schematic illustration of porogen emulsion and phase separation. [(B), ii] Bright-field microscope and scanning electron microscopy image of porous scaffold (Zhu et al., 2020). (C) Fibrous scaffolds. [(C), i] Schematic illustration of electrospinning. [(C), ii] Scanning electron microscopy of scaffold formed by aligned and random electrospun fibers (Amores de Sousa et al., 2020).
FIGURE 33D bioprinting model. (A) Establishment of a 3D bioprinted model. [(A), i] Schematic representation of the 3D bioprinting procedure. [(A), ii] Image of a 3D bioprinted model. Scale bar: 50 mm. [(A), iii] View of the in vitro model on days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 after 3D bioprinting. Scale bar: 1 mm. (Sun et al., 2020) (B) 3D bioprinted model for endothelialization and microfluidic perfusion using bioinks and sacrificial materials. [(B), i] Schematic illustration of a hydrogel-based microfluidic system generated with a sacrificial bioink used to template predefined channels. [(B), ii] Schematic illustration of the modified 3D bioprinting process, where a templating bioink loaded with endothelial cells for endothelialization and a matrix bioink are bioprinted side by side, followed by crosslinking of the matrix bioink and 37°C incubation to release the sacrificial bioink (Ouyang et al., 2020). (C) Schematic illustration of a 3D bioprinted model using dopamine-modified bioink. Adapted with permission. (Zhou et al., 2018) Copyright © 2018, American Chemical Society.
FIGURE 4Microfludic chip for the in vitro model. (A) Schematic representation of the fabrication process of a PDMS-based chip. [(A), i] Top and bottom PDMS microfluidic channel substrates are formed by pouring PDMS mixtures into a mold and demolding it from the master mold. [(A), ii] Coating PDMS substrate with silver nanowires (AgNW) solution on top of the bonding interface. [(A), iii] Stamping PDMS substrate on spin-coated uncured PDMS layer forming an AgNWs-embedded uncured PDMS adhesive layer. [(A), iv] Direct electrospinning nanofibers to the bottom PDMS microfluidic channel substrate. [(A), v] Forming a free-standing polycaprolactone (PCL) nanofiber membrane on the channel area. [(A), vi] Integration of nanofiber membrane-deposited PDMS substrate with top PDMS microfluidic channel substrate by the free-standing PCL nanofiber membrane. Adapted with permission. (Rhyou et al., 2021) Copyright © 2021, American Chemical Society. (B) Schematic illustration of the materials used for the fabrication of microfluidic chips in neurodegenerative studies such as Alzheimer’s disease (Prasanna et al., 2021). Hydrogels serve as matrices for cell culture in microfluidic chips. (C) Microfluidic device with planar and nanostructured electrodes. [(C), i] Scheme of the device. [(C), ii] Picture of the device from the top side. [(C), iii] Top surface in detail, with feed lines and electrodes on thin silicon nitride membranes (pink) and bulk surface (green) (Bruno et al., 2020). (D) In vitro BBB model co-culturing rat brain capillary endothelial cells with pericytes and astrocytes. [(D), i] Schematic of BBB models. [(D), ii] Effectiveness of co-culture on the induction of transendothelial electrical resistance (TEER) in brain capillary endothelial cell monolayers of in vitro BBB models, with the left upper panel indicating a very low TEER of astrocytes (filled square, 0A0) and pericytes (open square, 0P0) cultured on the inserts. [(D), iii] Transendothelial permeability changes for the paracellular permeability marker in brain capillary endothelial cell monolayers of in vitro BBB models (Nakagawa et al., 2007).
Overview of in vitro model of primary neurons, with their features, advantages, and limitations.
|
| Feature | Representative biomaterial | Advantage | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Novel 2D | Multicellular system cultured on 2D surface, with direct or indirect contact | Poly-lysine coated plate | Easy to establish | Cannot fully restore 3D morphologies and functional characteristics |
| Design flexibility | Lacks spatiotemporal arrangement | |||
| Well-recognized characterization methods | ||||
|
| Brain slice cultured on thin film inserts at gas–liquid interface | Porous membrane | Maintain cell diversity, 3D neuronal networks, and intact cellular connections | Limited culture duration |
| No technological or material requirement | Difficult to standardize | |||
| Spheroid | Cell clusters formed by aggregation and division | Matrigel or low-attachment plate | Partially reconstruct 3D structures | No control on composition or arrangement of cells |
| High throughput potential | Batch-to-batch heterogeneity | |||
| easy to construct | ||||
| Scaffold | Cells seeded and cultured on hydrogel or fibrous structures | Natural and synthetic polymers | Plasticity of ECM characteristics | Biocompatibility |
| Simulation of | Technological difficulty in production | |||
| Sustained release of cytokines or drugs | ||||
| Induction of neuronal network formation | ||||
| 3D bioprinting | Deposition of cells embedded in bioink as designed structure | Hydrogels with controlled gelling and printability | Precise control over spatial arrangement of cells | Shear stress damage to neurons |
| High throughput potential | High cost | |||
| Microfluidic chip | Neurons cultured in microfluidic device with multi-chamber design | PDMS | Fine regulation of environmental factors | High requirements for equipment |
| High reproducibility | Difficulty to develop physiologically relevant design | |||
| High throughput potential |