4.3 Article

Mimicked cartilage scaffolds of silk fibroin/hyaluronic acid with stern cells for osteoarthritis surgery: Morphological, mechanical, and physical clues

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2016.03.063

关键词

Silk fibroin; Hyaluronic acid; Mimicked scaffold; Cartilage tissue engineering

资金

  1. Academic Promotion and Development Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Thailand [54-171-25-2-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Osteoarthritis is a critical disease that comes from degeneration of cartilage tissue. In severe cases surgery is generally required. Tissue engineering using scaffolds with stem cell transplantation is an attractive approach and a challenge for orthopedic surgery. For sample preparation, silk fibroin (SF)/hyaluronic acid (HA) scaffolds in different ratios of SF/HA (w/w) (i.e.,100:0, 90:10, 80:20, and 70:30) were formed by freeze-drying. The morphological, mechanical, and physical clues were considered in this research. The morphological structure of the scaffolds was observed by scanning electron microscope. The mechanical and physical properties of the scaffolds were analyzed by compressive and swelling ratio testing, respectively. For the cell experiments, scaffolds were seeded and cultured with human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells (HUMSCs). The cultured scaffolds were tested for cell viability, histochemistry, immunohistochemistry, and gene expression. The SF with HA scaffolds showed regular porous structures. Those scaffolds had a soft and elastic characteristic with a high swelling ratio and water uptake. The SF/HA scaffolds showed a spheroid structure of the cells in the porous structure particularly in the SF80 and SF70 scaffolds. Cells could express Col2a, Agg, and Sox9 which are markers for chondrogenesis. It could be deduced that SF/HA scaffolds showed significant clues for suitability in cartilage tissue engineering and in surgery for osteoarthritis. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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