4.0 Article

Comparison of hydrogels in the in vivo formation of tissue-engineered bone using mesenchymal stem cells and beta-tricalcium phosphate

期刊

TISSUE ENGINEERING
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 757-765

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ten.2006.0083

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Availability of grafts and morbidity at the donor site limit autologous transplantation in patients requiring bone reconstruction. A tissue-engineering approach can overcome these limitations by producing bone-like tissue of custom shape and size from isolated cells. Several hydrogels facilitate osteogenesis on porous scaffolds; however, the relative suitability of various hydrogels has not been rigorously assessed. Fibrin glue, alginate, and collagen I hydrogels were mixed with swine bone marrow-derived differentiated mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), applied to 3-dimensionally printed porous beta-tricalcium phosphate (b-TCP) scaffolds and implanted subcutaneously in nude mice. Although noninvasive assessment of osteogenesis in 3 dimensions is desirable for monitoring new bone formation in vivo, correlations with traditional histological and mechanical testing need to be established. High-resolution volumetric computed tomography (VCT) scanning, histological examination, biomechanical compression testing, and osteonectin (ON) expression were performed on excised scaffolds after 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks of subcutaneous implantation in mice. Statistical correlation analyses were performed between radiological density, stiffness, and ON expression. Use of collagen I as a hydrogel carrier produced superior bone formation at 6 weeks, as demonstrated using VCT scanning with densities similar to native bone and the highest compression values. Continued contribution of the seeded MSCs was demonstrated using swine-specific messenger ribonucleic acid probes. Radiological density values correlated closely with the results of histological and biomechanical testing and ON expression. High-resolution VCT is a promising method for monitoring osteogenesis.

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

4.0
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