4.8 Article

Growth factor supplementation improves native and engineered meniscus repair in vitro

期刊

ACTA BIOMATERIALIA
卷 8, 期 10, 页码 3687-3694

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.06.005

关键词

Meniscus; Tissue engineering; Growth factors; Scaffolds

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 AR056624]
  2. Penn Center for Musculoskeletal Disorders [P30 AR050950]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Few therapeutic options exist for meniscus repair after injury. Local delivery of growth factors may stimulate repair and create a favorable environment for engineered replacement materials. In this study we assessed the effect of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) (a pro-mitotic agent) and transforming growth factor beta 3 (TGF-beta) (a pro-matrix formation agent) on meniscus repair and the integration/maturation of electrospun poly(epsilon-caprolactone) (PCL) scaffolds for meniscus tissue engineering. Circular meniscus repair constructs were formed and refilled with either native tissue or scaffolds. Repair constructs were cultured in serum-containing medium for 4 and 8 weeks with various growth factor formulations, and assessed for mechanical strength, biochemical content, and histological appearance. Results showed that either short-term delivery of bFGF or sustained delivery of TGF-beta 3 increased integration strength for both juvenile and adult bovine tissue, with similar findings for engineered materials. While TGF-beta 3 increased proteoglycan content in the explants, bFGF did not increase DNA content after 8 weeks of culture. This work suggests that in vivo delivery of bFGF or TGF-beta 3 may stimulate meniscus repair, but that the time course of delivery will strongly influence success. Further, this study demonstrates that electrospun scaffolds are a promising material for meniscus tissue engineering, achieving comparable or superior integration compared with native tissue. (C) 2012 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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