4.3 Article

Pore shape and size dependence on cell growth into electrospun fiber scaffolds for tissue engineering: 2D and 3D analyses using SEM and FIB-SEM tomography

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2017.08.076

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Centre in Poland [DEC-2013/08/M/ST8/00332]
  2. Sonata 8 project - National Science Centre NCN in Poland [2014/15/D/ST5/02598]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrospun nanofibers have ability to boost cell proliferation in tissue engineered scaffolds as their structure remind cells extra cellular matrix of the native tissue. The complex architecture and network of nanofibrous scaffolds requires advanced characterization methods to understand interrelationship between cells and nanofibers. In our study, we used complementary 2D and 3D analyses of electrospun polylactide-co-glycolide acid (PLGA) scaffolds in two configurations: aligned and randomly oriented nanofibers. Sizes of pores and fibers, pores shapes and porosity, before and after cell culture, were verified by imaging with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and combination of focus ion beam (FIB) and SEM to obtain 3D reconstructions of samples. Using FIB-SEM tomography for 3D reconstructions and 2D analyses, a unique set of data allowing understanding cell proliferation mechanism into the electrospun scaffolds, was delivered. Critically, the proliferation of cells into nanofibers network depends mainly on the pore shape and pores interconnections, which allow deep integration between cells and nanofibers. The proliferation of cells inside the network of fibers is much limited for aligned fibers comparing to randomly oriented fibers. For random fibers cells have easier way to integrate inside the scaffold as the circularity of pores and their sizes are larger than for aligned scaffolds. The complex architecture of electrospun scaffolds requires appropriate, for tissue engineering needs, cell seeding and culture methods, to maximize tissue growth in vitro environment.

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