Myoblast 3D bioprinting to burst in vitro skeletal muscle differentiation.
commercially hydrogel bioinks
murine myoblasts (C2C12)
muscle differentiation
three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting
Journal
Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine
ISSN: 1932-7005
Titre abrégé: J Tissue Eng Regen Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101308490
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
revised:
28
01
2022
received:
13
09
2021
accepted:
17
02
2022
pubmed:
6
3
2022
medline:
6
5
2022
entrez:
5
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Skeletal muscle regeneration is one of the major areas of interest in sport medicine as well as trauma centers. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting (BioP) is nowadays widely adopted to manufacture 3D constructs for regenerative medicine but a comparison between the available biomaterial-based inks (bioinks) is missing. The present study aims to assess the impact of different hydrogels on the viability, proliferation, and differentiation of murine myoblasts (C2C12) encapsulated in 3D bioprinted constructs aided to muscle regeneration. We tested three different commercially available hydrogels bioinks based on: (1) gelatin methacrylate and alginate crosslinked by UV light; (2) gelatin methacrylate, xanthan gum, and alginate-fibrinogen; (3) nanofibrillated cellulose (NFC)/alginate-fibrinogen crosslinked with calcium chloride and thrombin. Constructs embedding the cells were manufactured by extrusion-based BioP and C2C12 viability, proliferation, and differentiation were assessed after 24 h, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days in culture. Although viability, proliferation, and differentiation were observed in all the constructs, among the investigated bioinks, the best results were obtained by using NFC/alginate-fibrinogen-based hydrogel from 7 to 14 days in culture, when the embedded myoblasts started fusing, forming at day 21 and day 28 multinucleated myotubes within the 3D bioprinted structures. The results revealed an extensive myotube alignment all over the linear structure of the hydrogel, demonstrating cell maturation, and enhanced myogenesis. The bioprinting strategies that we describe here denote a strong and endorsed approach for the creation of in vitro artificial muscle to improve skeletal muscle tissue engineering for future therapeutic applications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35246958
doi: 10.1002/term.3293
pmc: PMC9311434
doi:
Substances chimiques
Alginates
0
Hydrogels
0
Methacrylates
0
Gelatin
9000-70-8
Fibrinogen
9001-32-5
Cellulose
9004-34-6
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
484-495Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Ann Biomed Eng. 2004 Dec;32(12):1728-43
pubmed: 15675684
Bioact Mater. 2019 Oct 25;4:271-292
pubmed: 31709311
Nat Biotechnol. 2016 Mar;34(3):312-9
pubmed: 26878319
Nat Biotechnol. 2014 Aug;32(8):773-85
pubmed: 25093879
Biomaterials. 2005 May;26(15):2467-77
pubmed: 15585249
Ann Biomed Eng. 2015 Mar;43(3):730-46
pubmed: 25476164
Regen Med. 2008 Jan;3(1):93-103
pubmed: 18154465
Cell Mol Life Sci. 2016 Nov;73(22):4175-4202
pubmed: 27271751
Physiol Behav. 2017 Jul 1;176:139-148
pubmed: 28363838
Nat Biotechnol. 2005 Jul;23(7):879-84
pubmed: 15965465
Nat Commun. 2014 Jun 02;5:3935
pubmed: 24887553
EMBO Mol Med. 2015 Feb 25;7(4):411-22
pubmed: 25715804
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2020 May;9(5):575-589
pubmed: 31975556
Polymers (Basel). 2019 Mar 26;11(3):
pubmed: 30960553
J Biomed Biotechnol. 2011;2011:492075
pubmed: 22187527
Sci Rep. 2019 Dec 27;9(1):19914
pubmed: 31882581
J R Soc Interface. 2018 Jan;15(138):
pubmed: 29343633
Biofabrication. 2013 Mar;5(1):015003
pubmed: 23172592
Cell Death Dis. 2020 Aug 18;11(8):654
pubmed: 32811811
Science. 2012 Nov 16;338(6109):921-6
pubmed: 23161993
Mater Today Bio. 2020 Jul 09;7:100069
pubmed: 32695987
Nat Med. 2008 Feb;14(2):213-21
pubmed: 18193059
FASEB J. 2005 Feb;19(2):275-7
pubmed: 15574489
Biofabrication. 2018 Nov 23;11(1):013001
pubmed: 30468151
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2015 Aug 28;464(3):755-61
pubmed: 26164231
Biomaterials. 2020 Feb;230:119632
pubmed: 31761486
Biofabrication. 2013 Sep;5(3):035007
pubmed: 23817739
Biomaterials. 2003 Jun;24(13):2363-78
pubmed: 12699674
J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2022 May;16(5):484-495
pubmed: 35246958
Front Physiol. 2014 May 30;5:203
pubmed: 24910618
Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2017;18(4):309-317
pubmed: 28155605
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2016 May;19(3):182-7
pubmed: 26910194
Biomaterials. 2016 Sep;102:20-42
pubmed: 27318933
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2017 Apr 07;5:22
pubmed: 28439516
ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018 Nov 12;4(11):3906-3918
pubmed: 33429605
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2017 Sep;105(9):2582-2588
pubmed: 28544472
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Feb 16;22(4):
pubmed: 33669272
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2021 Jan 21;32(1):15
pubmed: 33475855
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Sep 29;106(39):16568-73
pubmed: 19805339
Nat Med. 2006 Mar;12(3):361-5
pubmed: 16491087
Micromachines (Basel). 2019 Oct 09;10(10):
pubmed: 31601016
Sci Transl Med. 2014 Apr 30;6(234):234ra58
pubmed: 24786326
Biomaterials. 2020 Jan;226:119536
pubmed: 31648135
Tissue Eng Part A. 2013 Sep;19(17-18):1960-71
pubmed: 23611597
Skelet Muscle. 2012 Nov 26;2(1):24
pubmed: 23181356
Aging (Albany NY). 2020 Jul 26;12(14):13939-13957
pubmed: 32712599
Biofabrication. 2020 Feb 07;12(2):022001
pubmed: 31822648
Adv Mater. 2013 Sep 25;25(36):5011-28
pubmed: 24038336
Tissue Eng Part A. 2008 Jan;14(1):127-33
pubmed: 18333811