Attachment and Growth of Fibroblasts and Tenocytes Within a Porous Titanium Scaffold: A Bioreactor Approach.
Fibroblast
Porous titanium scaffold
Tenocyte
Journal
Arthroplasty today
ISSN: 2352-3441
Titre abrégé: Arthroplast Today
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101681808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
12
08
2021
revised:
27
09
2021
accepted:
04
12
2021
entrez:
5
5
2022
pubmed:
6
5
2022
medline:
6
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Direct attachment of tendons to metallic implants is important in orthopedics. Tissue integration depends on scaffold microstructure and composition. This study evaluated the effect of pore size of titanium on the viability and function of fibroblasts and tenocytes in a dynamic bioreactor. Standardized Ti porous cylinders with 3 pore sizes (400, 700, and 1000 μm) were seeded with fibroblasts or tenocytes (4500 cells/μL) in silicon tubes. Cells were analyzed via alamarBlue (AB) assay in addition to scanning electron microscopy at day 7 (fibroblasts) or day 8 (tenocytes) and day 15. AB functions as a cell health indicator where functional living cells reduce the resazurin dye (blue) in the solution to resorufin (pink), and cell viability can be quantified via spectroscopy. At day 7, fibroblasts cultured on all sizes reduced AB, with significant differences noted between 400 vs 1000 μm ( While both fibroblasts and tenocytes penetrated the pores, fibroblasts preferred larger size, whereas tenocytes favored smaller size. Results are encouraging since soft-tissue attachment to a metallic scaffold is difficult but clinically desirable. Future studies could be performed in an in vivo animal model.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Direct attachment of tendons to metallic implants is important in orthopedics. Tissue integration depends on scaffold microstructure and composition. This study evaluated the effect of pore size of titanium on the viability and function of fibroblasts and tenocytes in a dynamic bioreactor.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Standardized Ti porous cylinders with 3 pore sizes (400, 700, and 1000 μm) were seeded with fibroblasts or tenocytes (4500 cells/μL) in silicon tubes. Cells were analyzed via alamarBlue (AB) assay in addition to scanning electron microscopy at day 7 (fibroblasts) or day 8 (tenocytes) and day 15. AB functions as a cell health indicator where functional living cells reduce the resazurin dye (blue) in the solution to resorufin (pink), and cell viability can be quantified via spectroscopy.
Results
UNASSIGNED
At day 7, fibroblasts cultured on all sizes reduced AB, with significant differences noted between 400 vs 1000 μm (
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
While both fibroblasts and tenocytes penetrated the pores, fibroblasts preferred larger size, whereas tenocytes favored smaller size. Results are encouraging since soft-tissue attachment to a metallic scaffold is difficult but clinically desirable. Future studies could be performed in an in vivo animal model.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35510067
doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.12.003
pii: S2352-3441(21)00238-7
pmc: PMC9059072
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
231-236.e1Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors.
Références
J Arthroplasty. 2008 Aug;23(5):694-8
pubmed: 18534495
Biomaterials. 2005 Aug;26(24):4948-55
pubmed: 15769530
Bioengineering (Basel). 2018 Apr 24;5(2):
pubmed: 29695077
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Dec 9;100(25):14683-8
pubmed: 14657343
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015 Feb;23(2):95-106
pubmed: 25624362
Biomatter. 2012 Oct-Dec;2(4):167-75
pubmed: 23507883
Cell tissue biol. 2010;4(6):572-579
pubmed: 21949585
Materials (Basel). 2011 May 09;4(5):893-907
pubmed: 28879956
J Arthroplasty. 2006 Feb;21(2):233-6
pubmed: 16520212
J Biomed Mater Res. 2002 Sep 5;61(3):482-92
pubmed: 12115474
ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2017 Nov 15;9(45):39235-39248
pubmed: 29058878
J Biomed Biotechnol. 2009;2009:873816
pubmed: 20037739
J Anat. 1986 Dec;149:89-100
pubmed: 3693113
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018 Dec;88:478-487
pubmed: 30223211
J Biomech. 2017 May 3;56:55-60
pubmed: 28366437
Chir Organi Mov. 2008 Feb;91(2):87-92
pubmed: 18320380
Biomaterials. 2015 May;51:108-118
pubmed: 25771002
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2000 Dec;10(6):312-20
pubmed: 11085557
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003 Feb 1;64(2):235-41
pubmed: 12522809
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003 Jul-Aug;11(4):238-47
pubmed: 12889862
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:171945
pubmed: 25767803
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Jul;33(7S):S244-S248
pubmed: 29248484
Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2017 Mar;25(1):41-50
pubmed: 28045873
Biomaterials. 2001 Jun;22(11):1279-88
pubmed: 11336300
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Jun 15;93(12):1137-43
pubmed: 21776550
J Arthroplasty. 1997 Feb;12(2):202-6
pubmed: 9139103
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017 Jan;65:295-305
pubmed: 27614271