4.5 Article

Characterization of chitosan-gelatin scaffolds for dermal tissue engineering

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/term.492

关键词

chitosan; gelatin; scaffold; dermis; bioglue; artificial skin

资金

  1. National Science Council, Taiwan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Porous scaffolds for dermal tissue engineering were fabricated by freeze-drying a mixture of chitosan and gelatin (CG) solutions. Different crosslinking agents including glutaraldehyde, 1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethyl-carbodimide hydrochloride (EDC), and genipin were used to crosslink the scaffolds and improve their biostability. The porous structure and mechanical properties were determined for the scaffolds. The proliferation of human fibroblasts in the scaffolds was analyzed. It was found that EDC crosslinked scaffolds had the greatest amount of cells after four days. EDC crosslinked CG scaffolds had tensile modulus in a dry state and compressive modulus in a wet state similar to commercial collagen wound dressing. They also showed appropriate pore size, high water absorption, and good dimensional stability during cell culture. When human fibroblasts were seeded on acellular porcine dermis (APD), acellular human dermis (AHD), and CG scaffolds for 3D cell culture, they were well-distributed in the centre of the CG scaffolds but stayed only on the superficial layer of APD or AHD after seven days. A gelatin-based bioglue was applied to the CG scaffolds where the keratinocytes were seeded to mimic epidermal structure. After 14 days, the bioglue degraded and keratinocytes grew to form monolayers on the scaffolds. This study showed that CG scaffolds crosslinked by EDC and seeded with human fibroblasts could serve as dermal constructs, while the bioglue coating seeded with keratinocytes could serve as an epidermal construct. Such a combination could help regenerate skin with integrated dermal and epidermal layers and a have potential use in tissue-engineered skin. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据