| Literature DB >> 36093328 |
Jiaxin Guo1,2, Hao Yao1,2, Xu Li1,2, Liang Chang1,2, Zixuan Wang3, Wangyong Zhu4, Yuxiong Su4, Ling Qin1,2, Jiankun Xu1,2.
Abstract
Mandibular defect becomes a prevalent maxillofacial disease resulting in mandibular dysfunctions and huge psychological burdens to the patients. Considering the routine presence of oral contaminations and aesthetic restoration of facial structures, the current clinical treatments are however limited, incapable to reconstruct the structural integrity and regeneration, spurring the need for cost-effective mandibular tissue engineering. Hydrogel systems possess great merit for mandibular reconstruction with precise involvement of cells and bioactive factors. In this review, current clinical treatments and distinct mode(s) of mandible formation and pathological resorption are summarized, followed by a review of hydrogel-related mandibular tissue engineering, and an update on the advanced fabrication of hydrogels with improved mechanical property, antibacterial ability, injectable form, and 3D bioprinted hydrogel constructs. The exploration of advanced hydrogel systems will lay down a solid foundation for a bright future with more biocompatible, effective, and personalized treatment in mandibular reconstruction.Entities:
Keywords: Bone regeneration; Hydrogel; Injectable materials; Mandibular defect; Tissue engineering
Year: 2022 PMID: 36093328 PMCID: PMC9413641 DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.08.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioact Mater ISSN: 2452-199X
Fig. 1Causative factors resulting in mandibular defects.
History of current clinical therapies in mandibular reconstruction.
| Clinical Therapies | Years | Key Events or Representative Publications | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Autologous and allogeneic bone transplantation | 1949 | Review paper of free bone grafts taken from tibia, rib, and iliac crest for mandibular reconstruction [ | – |
| 1979 | A report on the use of iliac crest free flap with micro-vessels | The superiority of the deep circumflex iliac vessels [ | |
| 1979–1997 | A report of 178 mandibular reconstruction cases using microvascular-free flaps | Donor site selection strategies: ilium, fibula, or scapula (lateral bony defect), fibula (anterior bony defect) [ | |
| 1981 | Combined homologous mandible and autologous bone and bone marrow | Failure in patients who have previous radiation therapy [ | |
| 1989 | The fibula-free flap (FFF) transplantation has become the gold standard | All osteotomies healed primarily in 12 patients [ | |
| 2009 | Non-vascularized bone grafts | Suitable for the condition that the defect is truly lateral and only an extraoral approach. 86% of patients with a successful initial reconstruction [ | |
| Metallic devices | 1909 | Silver wire [ | – |
| 1953 | A stainless-steel mesh prosthesis for mandibular replacement | Successful rate of 67/102 patients, failure in patients associated with histories of previous irradiation, extensive resections, and the loss of distant skin flaps [ | |
| 1990s | Titanium (Ti) and titanium alloys [ | 71% successful rate. Plate loss occurred in large lateral defects, and pre- or postoperative radiotherapy [ | |
| 2000 | Titanium mesh wrapping cancellous bone grafts | Exposure of the titanium mesh is 7/16 in maxillary and 16/29 in mandible. The success of the bone grafting procedure was 97.72% [ | |
| 2010s | Magnesium (Mg)-based Materials [ | Mg screw was able to distribute the stress to the condyle and ramus region compared to polylactic acid polymer group [ | |
| 2016 | Finite element simulation and 3D printing technology prefabricated titanium meshes [ | 21 patients, insufficient bone formation (5 cases), postoperative infection (2 patients), Ti-mesh tray fracture in 2 patients | |
| 2022 | Patient-specific 3D-printed miniplates for free flap fixation | High accuracy of reconstruction (3.64 ± 1.18 mm), Osseous union occurred in all intersegmental gaps [ | |
| Distraction osteogenesis | 1992 | First applied distraction osteogenesis to the mandibular deformities' reconstruction | Mandibular bone lengthening ranged from 18 to 24 mm [ |
| 1996 | A report of 5 cases of distraction osteogenesis in maxillofacial surgery | 5 patients, premature consolidation (2 cases), significant relapse (1 case) [ | |
| 1997 | Case report on a patient received trifocal distraction osteogenesis in oral floor cancer underwent surgery | Infection developed; Free bone transplants were needed for complete continuity [ | |
| 2000 | Combination of mandibular distraction osteogenesis with electrical stimulation (10 μA) | Significant increase in bone mineral density [ | |
| 2011 | Electrical stimulation on mandibular distraction osteogenesis conducted in clinical trials | 10 patients, 16 distraction sites, and direct current electrical stimulation promoted bone healing [ |
Fig. 2Strengths and weaknesses of current clinical approaches applied in mandibular reconstruction.
Fig. 3Osteogenic potential and regeneration in the mandible. (A) The fast turnover rate in the mandible: In-situ fluorescence of far-red fluorescent pamidronate signal (red) labeled BPs localization in the mandible. Scale bar = 50μm. (Copyright © American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, Ref [54]). (B) Schematic diagram showing the location and progression of neural crest subpopulations. The cranial neural crest developed into the craniofacial skeleton (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc, Ref [63]). (C) Placement of neural crest-derived periosteum into a mesoderm injury site resulted in an intramembranous bone formation. However, transplantation of the tibial periosteum initiated an endochondral ossification in the mandibular defect. GFP immunohistochemistry confirmed that the grafted cells were actively committed to the healing response (Copyright © 2022 The Company of Biologists, Ref [62]).
Properties of dental mesenchymal stem cells.
| Dental stem cells | Dental pulp stem cells | Stem cells isolated from human exfoliated deciduous teeth | Gingival mesenchymal stem/progenitor cells | Periodontal ligament stem cells |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 2003 | 2010 | 2004 | |
| Positively express Stro-1, CD29, CD44, CD90, CD105; Negatively express CD34, CD45 | Positively express Oct4, CD13, CD29, CD44, CD73, CD90, CD105, CD146, CD166; Negatively express CD14, CD34, CD45 | Positively express CD90, CD105, CD73, CD44, CD13; Negatively express CD34, CD38, CD45, CD54 | Positively express CD10, CD13, CD29, CD44, CD59, CD73, CD90, CD103; Negatively express CD14, CD34, CD45, CD38, CD54, HLA-DR | |
| Odontoblasts, osteoblasts, endothelial cells, adipocytes, neurons, and chondrocytes | Osteoblasts, neurons, adipocytes, and odontoblasts | Osteoblasts, adipocytes, and chondrocytes | Cementoblasts, adipocytes, osteoblasts, and fibroblasts | |
| Great Potentials in bone vascularization | Rich sources; great clinical translational potential | Less painful collection | Strong adhesion, rapid growth, and proliferation; ideal material for regenerating the periodontal tissue defects | |
| [ | [ | [ | [ |
Fig. 4Potential micro/nanoparticles used in mandibular tissue engineering.
Applications of Hydrogel systems with seed cells, nanoparticles, and growth factors for mandibular reconstruction.
| Materials/Hydrogels | Nanoparticles | Agents/Cells | Animal models | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hyaluronic acid hydrogel | Nano-HA | BMP-2 | Rat mandibular defect | [ |
| Collagen/alginate hydrogel | Nano-HA | NGF | New Zealand white rabbit mandibular defect with distraction osteogenesis | [ |
| Collagen sponge/hyaluronic acid hydrogel/PCL outer box | – | rhBMP-2/hBMSCs | Rabbit mandibular defect | [ |
| PEG hydrogel | HA/β-TCP | rhBMP-2 | Minipig alveolar defect | [ |
| Chitosan and chondroitin sulfate | – | BMP-2/ADSCs | Rat Mandibular Defect | [ |
| Chitosan/collagen hydrogel/Gelatin microsphere | – | rhBMP2 | Rabbit mandibular defect | [ |
| Alginate-fibrin microfibers | Calcium phosphate cement | hBMSCs | Rat mandibular defect | [ |
| Calcium alginate hydrogels and polylactic acid (PLA) | – | hPDLCs/BMSCs | Rabbit mandibular defect | [ |
| PLA/gelatin hydrogel | Cyclic RGD conjugated gold NPs | hADSCs | – | [ |
| Mannuronate (SLM) alginate, high guluronate (SLG) alginate, hyaluronan derivative (HApN) | Collagen-I based recombinant peptide microspheres | BMP-2 | Subcutaneously in rats | [ |
| Alginate/hyaluronic acid hydrogels | – | BMP-2/hBMSCs | Miniature pig mandibular defects | [ |
| Alginate/hyaluronic acid hydrogels | – | Vancomycin, BMP-2 | Osteomyelitis rat model | [ |
| Supramolecular hydrogel (SDF-1/BMP-2/NapFFY) | – | BMP-2, SDF-1 | Rat periodontal bone defect | [ |
| Gelatin | – | Fibroblast growth factor | Rat BRONJ | [ |
| PEG–PLGA–PNIPAM hydrogel | Silica NPs | microRNA-222 and ASP | Rat mandibular defects | [ |
| N-carboxyethyl chitosan (CEC)/hyaluronic acid-aldehyde (HA-ALD)/adipic acid dihydrazide (ADH) | Nano-HA | – | Mandibular incisors of rat | [ |
| CS scaffolds | Nano-HA/PLGA microspheres | BMP-2/VEGF | Rabbit mandibular defects | [ |
| Modifying HA with both methacrylate (MA) and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (Dopa) | – | – | Maxillofacial tissue | [ |
| Hyaluronic acid hydrogel | β-tricalcium phosphate | rhBMP-2 | Minipig mandibular defect | [ |
Fig. 5Clinical application of hydrogel in mandibular reconstruction. (A) CT image of the mandibular lesion. (B) Tumor specimen. (C) Bioimplant (rhBMP-2/Absorable collage sponge) inserted and covered by titanium mesh (A-C, Copyright © 2011 Alan S. Herford et al. Ref [141]). (D) Another clinical case used absorbable collagen containing rhBMP-2 in the concave area of the titanium mesh. (E) Histology showed a large amount of newly formed bone and bone marrow/connective tissue in the rhBMP-2-containing collagen implanted area (D-E, Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B·V., Ref. [146]).
Fig. 6Antibacterial hydrogels for potential oral and maxillofacial applications. (A) Adhesive liposome, SH-PEG, and Ag+ constructed an adhesive, self-healing, and antibacterial hydrogel (Copyright © 2022 Springer Nature Limited, Ref [184]). (B) SEM images of bacterial cells treated (right panel) with MgO NPs (Copyright © 2022 BioMed Central Ltd, Ref [196]). (C) Controlled delivery of Vancomycin via charged hydrogels for combating surgical site infections. (D) Best fit of data calculated by the phenomenological mathematical model described in the text. (C-D, Copyright © PLOS, #C2354500, Ref [197]). Bacterial membrane structures (E) and mechanisms of action of AMPs (F) (Copyright © 1996–2022 MDPI unless otherwise stated, Ref [198]).
Fig. 7Physical and chemical crosslinking of hydrogel synthesis (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B·V., Ref [228]).
Fig. 8Hydrogel system-based mandibular reconstruction by 3D bioprinting. (A) Multiple-components 3D bioprinting used to generate ‘Print-and-Implant’ scaffold for bone repair (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc., Ref [238]). (B) CAD file of the jawbone model. (C) (Left) Microscopic images of the prints on day 0 and after 28 days of cultivation. (Right) Immunohistochemical staining of CD31 in the bioprinted human jawbone models in vitro, the surface of the constructs is marked with white dotted lines. (B-C, Copyright © 2022 Springer Nature Limited, Ref [235]). (D) 3D Printed silicone–hydrogel interpenetrating polymer network (IPN) with biomolecules delivering and cell fate directing (Copyright © 2022 American Chemical Society, Ref [239]).
3D bioprinted constructs used for mandibular regeneration.
| Type of constructs | Models | Outcome | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| HAp/epoxide acrylate maleic artificial implants | Patients with craniomaxillofacial bone defects | Enhanced aesthetic results and functional recovery | [ |
| 3D bioprinted PEKK scaffolds combined with ADSCs | Rabbit mandibular defects | Enhanced integration and bone formation | [ |
| PCL/CS hydrogel with HAp coating custom scaffolds with orthogonal interconnected channels | Well mimicking human mandibular condyle | [ | |
| 3D bioprinted bone constructs of PCL/HA and SVF-derived cell (SVFC)-laden hydrogel bioink | Successfully microvessel formation | [ | |
| 3D bioprinted PCL/TCP scaffolds combined hAFSCs-laden hydrogel with a Pluronic F127 temporary support | Successful fabrication of mandible, calvarial bone, cartilage, and skeletal muscle | [ | |
| 3D bioprinted Multicellular (osteoblasts and endothelial cells) GelMA/PEGDA scaffold | Successful biofabrication of a human jawbone model | [ | |
| 3D bioprinted PCL/hydrogel scaffold with RVS and SrRn sustained releasing | Rat mandibular defects | Enhanced mandibular bone formation after 8-week implantation | [ |