4.8 Article

Response of bone marrow stromal cells to graded co-electrospun scaffolds and its implications for engineering the ligament-bone interface

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 33, 期 31, 页码 7727-7735

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.07.008

关键词

Ligament-bone interface; Graded scaffold; Electrospinning; Hydroxyapatite; Bone marrow stromal cells; Osteoblastic differentiation

资金

  1. Institute for Critical Technologies and Applied Sciences at Virginia Tech

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biomaterial scaffolds with gradients in architecture, mechanical and chemical properties have the potential to improve the osseointegration of ligament grafts by recapitulating phenotypic gradients that exist at the natural ligament-bone (L-B) interface. Towards the larger goal of regenerating the L-B interface, this in vitro study was performed to investigate the potential of two scaffolds with mineral gradients in promoting a spatial gradient of osteoblastic differentiation. Specifically, the first graded scaffold was fabricated by co-electrospinning two polymer solutions (one doped with nano-hydroxyapatite particles) from offset spinnerets, while the second was created by immersing the first scaffold in a 5 x simulated body fluid. Rat bone marrow stromal cells, cultured in the presence of osteogenic supplements, were found to be metabolically active on all regions of both scaffolds after 1 and 7 days of culture. Gene expression of bone morphogenic protein-2 and osteopontin was elevated on mineral-containing regions as compared to regions without mineral, while the expression of alkaline phosphatase mRNA revealed the opposite trend. Finally, the presence of osteopontin and bone sialoprotein confirmed osteoblastic phenotypic maturation by day 28. This study indicates that co-electrospun scaffolds with gradients in mineral content can guide the formation of phenotypic gradients and may thus promote the regeneration of the L-B interface. (c) 2012 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