4.8 Article

Micromechanical property mismatch between pericellular and extracellular matrices regulates stem cell articular and hypertrophic chondrogenesis

期刊

MATTER
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.matt.2022.11.008

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We developed a biomaterial-based engineering strategy to create cartilage-tissue equivalents with microarchitecture similar to native cartilage. The mechanical property mismatch between soft pericellular matrix and stiff extracellular matrix regulates the behavior of human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) during cartilage repair. Our findings highlight the importance of the pericellular-extracellular matrix mechanical property mismatch in hMSC-based cartilage repair under dynamic compression.
Within the complex microarchitecture of native cartilage tissue, the micromechanical properties of pericellular and extracellular matrices (PCM and ECM) potentially play important roles in devel-opmental, physiological, and pathological processes. Here, we report a unique biomaterial-based engineering strategy to create cartilage-tissue equivalents possessing PCM-ECM microarchitec-ture of native cartilage, where human mesenchymal stem cell (hMSC)-laden soft microgels representing PCM are encapsulated in stiff hydrogels representing ECM. Mechanical property mis-matches between soft PCM and stiff ECM under cyclic compression regulates hMSC proliferation and chondrogenesis. High PCM-ECM mechanical mismatch (softer PCM) and the presence of PCM degra-dation under cyclic compression individually or synergistically direct hMSC articular chondrogenesis through the proliferation -associ-ated protein kinase C signaling pathway, whereas low PCM-ECM mechanical mismatch (stiffer PCM) is solely responsible for hMSC hy-pertrophic chondrogenesis through the yes-associated protein signaling pathway. Our findings highlight PCM-ECM mechanical property mismatch as a critical design cue under dynamic compres-sion for hMSC-based cartilage repair.

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