4.7 Article

Composite scaffolds for the engineering of hollow organs and tissues

Journal

METHODS
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 109-115

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2008.10.014

Keywords

Composite scaffolds; PGA; Acellular bladder matrix; Hollow organs; Bladder

Funding

  1. Gebert Ruef Stiftung, Switzerland, Astra Zeneca, Switzerland
  2. Swiss Urological Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several types of synthetic and naturally derived biomaterials have been used for augmenting hollow organs and tissues. However, each has desirable traits which were exclusive of the other. We fabricated a composite scaffold and tested its potential for the engineering of hollow organs in a bladder tissue model. The composite scaffolds were configured to accommodate a large number of cells on one side and were designed to serve as a barrier on the opposite side. The scaffolds were fabricated by bonding a collagen matrix to PGA polymers with threaded collagen fiber stitches. Urothelial and bladder smooth muscle cells were seeded on the composite scaffolds, and implanted in mice for up to 4 weeks and analyzed. Both cell types readily attached and proliferated on the scaffolds and formed bladder tissue-like structures in vivo. These structures consisted of a luminal urothelial layer, a collagen rich compartment and a peripheral smooth muscle layer. Biomechanical studies demonstrated that the tissues were readily elastic while maintaining their pre-configured structures. This study demonstrates that a composite scaffold can be fabricated with two completely different polymer systems for the engineering of hollow organs. The composite scaffolds are biocompatible, possess adequate physical and structural characteristics for bladder tissue engineering, and are able to form tissues in vivo. This scaffold system may be useful in patients requiring hollow organ replacement. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available