Article

In vitro characterization of three-dimensional scaffolds seeded with human bone marrow stromal cells for tissue engineered growth of bone: mission impossible? A methodological approach.

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, George-Augusta-University, Göttingen, Germany.
Clinical Oral Implants Research (Impact Factor: 3.43). 05/2008; 19(4):379-86. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01483.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of the present report was to evaluate current methods of in vitro analysis of three-dimensional (3D) scaffolds seeded with human bone marrow stromal cells (hBMSCs) from six bone marrow aspirates for tissue engineered growth of bone.
A series of experiments was conducted to compare methods of cell expansion and to validate analysis of proliferation and differentiation of hBMSCs in long term cultures of up to 40 days in 3D scaffolds of calcium carbonate (CaCO(3)) and mineralized collagen. Proliferation within the seeded scaffolds was monitored using cell counting, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide (MTT), neutral red (NR) and DNA fluorescence assays and compared with empty controls. Differentiation was assessed by means of ELISA for osteocalcin (OC) and real time PCR for OC and collagen I (Coll I).
The results showed that the scaffold differed in seeding efficacy (CaCO(3): 53.3%, min. Coll.: 83.3%). The precise identification of the number of cells in biomaterials by MTT, NR and DNA assays was problematic, as MTT and NR assay overestimated the number of cells, whereas DNA assay grossly underestimated the number of cells on the scaffolds. Monitoring of changes over time may be biased by unspecific material-dependent background activity that has to be taken into account. Identification of osteogenic differentiation is not reliable by identifying osteogenic markers such as OC in the supernatant but has to be done on the transcriptional level.
It is concluded that monitoring of in vitro procedures for the construction of biohybrid scaffolds requires more emphasis in order to make the cell based approach a reliable treatment option in tissue engineering.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
40 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that both scaffold material and the type of cell culturing contribute to the results of in vivo osteogenesis in tissue-engineered constructs in an interactive manner. CaCO3 scaffolds and mineralized collagen scaffolds were seeded with human trabecular bone cells at a density of 5 x 10(6) cells/cm(3) and were left to attach under standard conditions for 24 h. Subsequently, they were submitted to static and dynamic culturing for 14 days (groups III and IV, respectively). Dynamic culturing was carried out in a continuous flow perfusion bioreactor. Empty scaffolds and scaffolds that were seeded with cells and kept under standard conditions for 24 h served as controls (groups I and II, respectively). Five scaffolds of each biomaterial and from each group were implanted into the gluteal muscles of rnu rats for 6 weeks. Osteogenesis was assessed quantitatively by histomorphometry and expression of osteocalcin (OC) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) was determined by immunohistochemistry. CaCO3 scaffolds exhibited 15.8% (SD 3.1) of newly formed bone after static culture and 22.4% (SD 8.2) after dynamic culture. Empty control scaffolds did not show bone formation, and scaffolds after 24 h of standard conditions produced 8.2% of newly formed bone (SD 4.0). Differences between the controls and the scaffolds cultured for 14 days were significant, but there was no significant difference between static and dynamic culturing. Mineralized collagen scaffolds did not show bone formation in any group. There was a significant difference in the expression of OC within the scaffolds submitted to static versus dynamic culturing in the CaCO3 scaffolds. VEGF expression did not show significant differences between static and dynamic culturing in the two biomaterials tested. It is concluded that within the limitations of the study the type of biomaterial had the dominant effect on in vivo bone formation in small tissue-engineered scaffolds. The culture period additionally affected the amount of bone formed, whereas the type of culturing may have had a positive effect on the expression of osteogenic markers but not on the quantity of bone formation.
    Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A 08/2009; 90(2):429-37. · 2.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Regenerative medicine seeks to repair or replace damaged tissues or organs, with the goal to fully restore structure and function without the formation of scar tissue. Cell based therapies are promising new therapeutic approaches in regenerative medicine. By using mesenchymal stem cells, good results have been reported for bone engineering in a number of clinical studies, most of them investigator initiated trials with limited scope with respect to controls and outcome. With the implementation of a new regulatory framework for advanced therapeutic medicinal products, the stage is set to improve both the characterization of the cells and combination products, and pave the way for improved controlled and well-designed clinical trials. The incorporation of more personalized medicine approaches, including the use of biomarkers to identify the proper patients and the responders to treatment, will be contributing to progress in the field. Both translational and clinical research will move the boundaries in the field of regenerative medicine, and a coordinated effort will provide the clinical breakthroughs, particularly in the many applications of bone engineering.
    Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 01/2011; 15(6):1266-86. · 4.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The repair of large and complex bone defects could be helped by a cell-based bone tissue engineering strategy. A reliable and consistent cell-seeding methodology is a mandatory step in bringing bone tissue engineering into the clinic. However, optimization of the cell-seeding step is only relevant when it can be reliably evaluated. The cell seeding efficiency (CSE) plays a fundamental role herein. Results showed that cell lysis and the definition used to determine the CSE played a key role in quantifying the CSE. The definition of CSE should therefore be consistent and unambiguous. The study of the influence of five drop-seeding-related parameters within the studied test conditions showed that (i) the cell density and (ii) the seeding vessel did not significantly affect the CSE, whereas (iii) the volume of seeding medium-to-free scaffold volume ratio (MFR), (iv) the seeding time, and (v) the scaffold morphology did. Prolonging the incubation time increased the CSE up to a plateau value at 4 h. Increasing the MFR or permeability by changing the morphology of the scaffolds significantly reduced the CSE. These results confirm that cell seeding optimization is needed and that an evidence-based selection of the seeding conditions is favored.
    Tissue Engineering Part C Methods 12/2010; 16(6):1575-83. · 4.64 Impact Factor