4.7 Article

Fibrous protein composite scaffolds (3D) for tissue regeneration: An in vitro study on skeletal muscle regeneration

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2022.112656

关键词

Fibrous protein; 3D scaffold; Stiffness; C2C12 myogenesis; Muscle regeneration

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST)-Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research (INSPIRE) [IF150057]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the differentiation of myoblasts in bioengineered 3D composite scaffolds containing keratin and gelatin. The results show that the elastic modulus, water uptake, and degradation rate of the scaffolds significantly impact the myogenesis processes. Compared to HM1 scaffold, composite scaffolds HM2 and HM3 facilitate myogenesis. Among HM2 and HM3, the HM3 scaffold exhibits accelerated myogenesis, significant expression of myogenin mRNA levels, and extensive myotube development.
The present study explores the differentiation of myoblasts in bioengineered 3D composite scaffolds containing keratin and gelatin. Based on the composition and rheological properties three different scaffolds namely HM1, HM2 and HM3 were prepared, characterized and employed for the present study. The scaffolds were then subjected to C2C12 myoblasts differentiation under in vitro conditions as per the standard protocols. Results reveal a wide variation in the elastic modulus, water uptake and degradation rate of the scaffolds significantly impact the myogenesis processes. Composite scaffolds HM2 and HM3 ease the myogenesis compared to HM1, wherein, results in nil myogenesis. Among HM2 and HM3, accelerated myogenesis and the significant expression of myogenin mRNA levels along with extensive myotube development were observed in the HM3 scaffold. In conclusion, scaffolds modulus play a vital role in myogenesis and the observations of the present study provide a possible strategy for better skeletal muscle regeneration using composite scaffolds.

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

4.7
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