4.5 Article

Changes in mechanical properties and cellularity during long-term culture of collagen fiber ACL reconstruction scaffolds

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.30233

关键词

carbodiimide; ultraviolet irradiation; collagen; ACL reconstruction; fibroblast; tissue culture

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [AR 42230] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Resorbable scaffolds for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction should provide temporary mechanical function then gradually breakdown while promoting matrix synthesis by local cells. Crosslinking influences collagen's mechanical properties, degradation rate, and interactions with cells. Our objective was to compare the effects of different crosslinkers on cellularity and mechanical properties during long-term (8 week) culture of collagen fiber scaffolds. Fibers were fabricated from an acid-insoluble dispersion of bovine dermal collagen and crosslinked with either ultraviolet irradiation (UV; a physical crosslinker) or 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide (EDC; a chemical crosslinker). Scaffolds consisted of 50 fibers bundled in parallel. Initial attachment of fibroblasts was similar on both scaffolds; however, from 1 to 8 weeks in culture, UV-crosslinked scaffolds had significantly more cells attached than EDC-crosslinked scaffolds. The initial breaking load (3.50 N) and stiffness (2.23 N/mm) of EDC-crosslinked scaffolds were significantly greater than those of UV-crosslinked scaffolds (2.32 N; 1.21 N/mm) and were unaffected by long-term fibroblast culture. In contrast, the load-bearing capacity of fibroblast-seeded UV-crosslinked scaffolds decreased 60%, to 0.91 N after 8 weeks in culture. EDC-crosslinked scaffolds maintained strength and moderate cellularity; UV-crosslinked scaffolds, in contrast, were highly cellular, but had poor mechanical properties that decreased during culture. These in vitro results suggest that collagen fiber scaffolds crosslinked with EDC may be more suitable for ACL reconstruction than those crosslinked with UV. (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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