4.0 Article

Three-dimensional microchannels in biodegradable polymeric films for control orientation and phenotype of vascular smooth muscle cells

期刊

TISSUE ENGINEERING
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 2229-2240

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ten.2006.12.2229

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The poor mechanical strength and vasoactivity of current small-diameter tissue engineered blood vessels (TEBVs) remain unsolved problems. Given the plasticity of smooth muscle cells (SMCs), 1 of the main limitations of current scaffolding techniques is the difficulty in controlling SMC phenotype shifts in vitro. A synthetic phenotype allows the cells to rapidly proliferate and produce extracellular matrix (ECM), whereas a shift to contractile phenotype with organized ECM ultimately provides a functional blood vessel. In this study, 3D deep (65 mu m) and wide microchannels separated by high-aspect ratio (8) microwalls were successfully ultraviolet (UV) microembossed using a liquid UV polymerizable biodegradable macromer (poly(epsilon-caprolactone-r-L-lactide-r-glycolide) diacrylate) and the in vitro guidance effects of varying channel width (40-160 mu m) on SMCs were verified. The results show that SMCs cultured in the wider microchannels (80-160 mu m wide) switch from fibroblast morphology and random orientation to spindle-shaped morphology, and align along the direction of the microchannel nearing confluence achieved with similar cell density to unpatterned film. Further, an enhanced expression of smooth muscle alpha-actin of SMCs grown on micropatterns was found nearing confluence, which demonstrates a phenotype shift to a more contractile phenotype. These films are flexible and can be folded into tubular and lamellar structures for tissue engineering of small-diameter TEBVs as well as other organs such as esophagus or intestine. These results suggest that these micropatterned synthetic biodegradable scaffolds may be useful for guiding SMCs to grow into functional, small-diameter vascular grafts.

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