4.7 Article

Tendon Fascicle-Inspired Nanofibrous Scaffold of Polylactic acid/Collagen with Enhanced 3D-Structure and Biomechanical Properties

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-35536-8

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FP7 COST Action [MP1206]
  2. Italian Ministry of University and Research (MIUR)
  3. university of Bologna (Marco Polo grant)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Surgical treatment of tendon lesions still yields unsatisfactory clinical outcomes. The use of bioresorbable scaffolds represents a way forward to improve tissue repair. Scaffolds for tendon reconstruction should have a structure mimicking that of the natural tendon, while providing adequate mechanical strength and stiffness. In this paper, electrospun nanofibers of two crosslinked PLLA/ Collagen blends (PLLA/Coll-75/25, PLLA/Coll-50/50) were developed and then wrapped in bundles, where the nanofibers are predominantly aligned along the bundles. Bundle morphology was assessed via SEM and high-resolution x-ray computed tomography (XCT). The 0.4-micron resolution in XCT demonstrated a biomimetic morphology of the bundles for all compositions, with a predominant nanofiber alignment and some scatter (50-60% were within 12 degrees from the axis of the bundle), similar to the tendon microstructure. Human fibroblasts seeded on the bundles had increased metabolic activity from day 7 to day 21 of culture. The stiffness, strength and toughness of the bundles are comparable to tendon fascicles, both in the as-spun condition and after crosslinking, with moderate loss of mechanical properties after ageing in PBS (7 and 14 days). PLLA/Coll-75/25 has more desirable mechanical properties such as stiffness and ductility, compared to the PLLA/Coll-50/50. This study confirms the potential to bioengineer tendon fascicles with enhanced 3D structure and biomechanical properties.

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