4.5 Article

In vitro chondrogenesis with lysozyme susceptible bacterial cellulose as a scaffold

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/term.1644

关键词

bacterial cellulose; tissue engineering; mesenchymal stem cells; cartilage; chondrogenesis; extracellular matrix

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A current focus of tissue engineering is the use of adult human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) as an alternative to autologous chondrocytes for cartilage repair. Several natural and synthetic polymers (including cellulose) have been explored as a biomaterial scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering. While bacterial cellulose (BC) has been used in tissue engineering, its lack of degradability in vivo and high crystallinity restricts widespread applications in the field. Recently we reported the formation of a novel bacterial cellulose that is lysozyme-susceptible and -degradable in vivo from metabolically engineered Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Here we report the use of this modified bacterial cellulose (MBC) for cartilage tissue engineering using hMSCs. MBC's glucosaminoglycan-like chemistry, combined with in vivo degradability, suggested opportunities to exploit this novel polymer in cartilage tissue engineering. We have observed that, like BC, MBC scaffolds support cell attachment and proliferation. Chondrogenesis of hMSCs in the MBC scaffolds was demonstrated by real-time RT-PCR analysis for cartilage-specific extracellular matrix (ECM) markers (collagen type II, aggrecan and SOX9) as well as histological and immunohistochemical evaluations of cartilage-specific ECM markers. Further, the attachment, proliferation, and differentiation of hMSCs in MBC showed unique characteristics. For example, after 4 weeks of cultivation, the spatial cell arrangement and collagen type-II and ACAN distribution resembled those in native articular cartilage tissue, suggesting promise for these novel in vivo degradable scaffolds for chondrogenesis. Copyright (C) 2013 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