4.8 Article

Application of conductive PPy/SF composite scaffold and electrical stimulation for neural tissue engineering

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 255, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120164

关键词

3D bioprinting; Electrospinning; Silk fibroin; Polypyrrole; Electrical stimulation; Nerve

资金

  1. Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China [31830028]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC1105603, 2018YFC1105604]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81701835, 81671823, 31771054]
  4. Jiangsu Provincial Key Medical Center
  5. Jiangsu Government Scholarship for Overseas Studies (2018-2019)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrical stimulation (ES) with conductive polymers can dramatically enhance neurite outgrowth and promote neural regeneration. However, besides ES, the practical applications of neural repair is also highly dependent on the nerve cell functionality and response to substrate conductivity. Therefore, the combination of the ES and suitable materials, such as tissue scaffolds, has been applied to facilitate treatment of neural injuries and demonstrated great potential in peripheral nerve regeneration. In this study, polypyrrole/silk fibroin (PPy/SF) conductive composite scaffold was fabricated by 3D bioprinting and electrospinning. Schwann cells seeded on these scaffolds were electrically stimulated and hence demonstrated enhanced viability, proliferation and migration, as well as upregulated expression of neurotrophic factors. Furthermore, the constructed PPy/SF conductive nerve guidance conduits accompanying with ES could effectively promote axonal regeneration and remyelination in vivo. Moreover, we found that the MAPKs signal transduction pathway was activated by ES at the conductive conduit. Our findings demonstrate that the PPy/SF conductive composite scaffolds with longitudinal guidance exhibit favorable properties for clinical use and promotes nerve regeneration and functional recovery.

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

4.8
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