4.5 Article

In vitro and in vivo analysis of visible light crosslinkable gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) hydrogels

期刊

BIOMATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 10, 页码 2093-2105

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7bm00110j

关键词

-

资金

  1. American Heart Association (AHA) [16SDG31280010]
  2. Northeastern University
  3. Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering at the Northeastern University
  4. National Institutes of Health [AR057837, DE021468, D005865, AR068258, AR066193, EB022403, EB021148]
  5. Office of Naval Research Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Photocrosslinkable materials have been frequently used for constructing soft and biomimetic hydrogels for tissue engineering. Although ultraviolet (UV) light is commonly used for photocrosslinking such materials, its use has been associated with several biosafety concerns such as DNA damage, accelerated aging of tissues, and cancer. Here we report an injectable visible light crosslinked gelatin-based hydrogel for myocardium regeneration. Mechanical characterization revealed that the compressive moduli of the engineered hydrogels could be tuned in the range of 5-56 kPa by changing the concentrations of the initiator, co-initiator and co-monomer in the precursor formulation. In addition, the average pore sizes (26-103 mu m) and swelling ratios (7-13%) were also shown to be tunable by varying the hydrogel formulation. In vitro studies showed that visible light crosslinked GelMA hydrogels supported the growth and function of primary cardiomyocytes (CMs). In addition, the engineered materials were shown to be biocompatible in vivo, and could be successfully delivered to the heart after myocardial infarction in an animal model to promote tissue healing. The developed visible light crosslinked hydrogel could be used for the repair of various soft tissues such as the myocardium and for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases with enhanced therapeutic functionality.

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

4.5
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