For the past few years, three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting has emerged as a promising approach in the field of regenerative medicine. This technique allows for the production of 3D scaffolds to support cell transplantation due to its ability to mimic the extracellular environment. One alternative to enhancing cell adhesion, survival, and proliferation is the use of decellularized extracellular matrix as a bioink component. The aim of this study was to produce a bioink using lyophilized rat decellularized spinal cord tissue (DSCT) for 3D bioprinting of nervous tissue. DNA quantification, hematoxylin and eosin and DAPI staining indicated that 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate and 9 h processing were effective in removing the cells from the spinal cord samples. The cell viability assay showed that the decellularized matrix is not cytotoxic for PC12 cells. The hydrogel containing DSCT, alginate, and gelatine used as the base for the bioink has a shear thinning behavior and low G″/G′ ratio, allowing for good printability without compromising cell viability after 3D bioprinting. The bioink supported long-term PC12 cell survival, with 93% of live cells 4 weeks after printing, and stimulated the production of laminin-1 and neurofilament-M. This bioink, therefore, represents an easily available biomaterial for central nervous system tissue engineering.
Impact statement
Despite being a highly debilitating condition, spinal cord injury has no effective treatment to this day. Three-dimensional bioprinting is a promising approach for this condition due to their ability to promote functional recovery with poor intrinsic regeneration capacity, such as the nervous tissue. We expect that the biomaterial developed in this study contributes to understanding this complex disorder and the development of an effective and functional therapy.
(Color images are available online).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AijieC, XuanL, HuiminL, et al.Nanoscaffolds in promoting regeneration of the peripheral nervous system. Nanomedicine, 2018; 13(9):1067–1085.
2.
ChenX, ZhaoY, LiX, et al.Functional multichannel poly(Propylene Fumarate)-collagen scaffold with collagen-binding neurotrophic factor 3 promotes neural regeneration after transected spinal cord injury. Adv Healthc Mater, 2018; 7(14):1800315; doi: 10.1002/adhm.201800315
3.
dos SantosMG, PrestesJP, PrankeP. Nanopolymers: Powerful tools in neuroprotection and neuroregeneration. Curr Nanosci, 2021; 18(6):668–674.
4.
GaoY, VijayaraghavaluS, SteesM, et al.Evaluating accessibility of intravenously administered nanoparticles at the lesion site in rat and pig contusion models of spinal cord injury. J Control Release, 2019; 302:160–168; doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.03.026
5.
StapenhorstF, Garrido dos SantosM, PrestesJP, et al.Bioprinting: A promising approach for tissue regeneration. Bioprinting, 2021; 22:e00130.
6.
ChoudhuryD, TunHW, WangT, et al.Organ-derived decellularized extracellular matrix: A game changer for bioink manufacturing?. Trends Biotechnol, 2018; 36(8):787–805; doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.03.003
7.
XieJ, MacEwanMR, SchwartzAG, et al.Electrospun nanofibers for neural tissue engineering. Nanoscale, 2010; 2(1):35–44.
8.
PapadimitriouL, ManganasP, RanellaA, et al.Biofabrication for neural tissue engineering applications. Mater Today Bio, 2020; 6:100043; doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2020.100043
9.
HsiehFY, LinHH, HsuSH. 3D bioprinting of neural stem cell-laden thermoresponsive biodegradable polyurethane hydrogel and potential in central nervous system repair. Biomaterials, 2015; 71:48–57; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.08.028
BendtsenST, QuinnellSP, WeiM. Development of a novel alginate-polyvinyl alcohol-hydroxyapatite hydrogel for 3D bioprinting bone tissue engineered scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2017; 105(5):1457–1468.
12.
ErcolaniE, Del GaudioC, BiancoA. Vascular tissue engineering of small-diameter blood vessels: Reviewing the electrospinning approach. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2015; 9(8):861–888; doi; 10.1016/j.trsl.2010.06.007
13.
ZhengR, DuanH, XueJ, et al.The influence of Gelatin/PCL ratio and 3-D construct shape of electrospun membranes on cartilage regeneration. Biomaterials, 2014; 35(1):152–164; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.09.082
14.
SteffensD, BraghirolliDI, MaurmannN, et al.Update on the main use of biomaterials and techniques associated with tissue engineering. Drug Discov Today, 2018; 23(8):1474–1488; doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2018.03.013
15.
XingY, VargheseB, LingZ, et al.Extracellular matrix by design: Native biomaterial fabrication and functionalization to boost tissue regeneration. Regen Eng Transl Med, 2022; 8(1):55–74.
16.
GaetaniR, AudeS, DemaddalenaLL, et al.Evaluation of different decellularization protocols on the generation of pancreas-derived hydrogels. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 2018; 24(12):697–708.
17.
AbaciA, GuvendirenM. Designing decellularized extracellular matrix-based bioinks for 3D bioprinting. Adv Healthc Mater, 2020; 9(24):1–18.
18.
SoodD, ChwalekK, StuntzE, et al.Fetal brain extracellular matrix boosts neuronal network formation in 3D bioengineered model of cortical brain tissue. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2016; 2(1):131–140.
XingH, YinH, SunC, et al.Preparation of an acellular spinal cord scaffold to improve its biological properties. Mol Med Rep, 2019; 20(2):1075–1084.
21.
MaYH, JuanSH, ShuaiWQ, et al.Developing a mechanically matched decellularized spinal cord scaffold for the in situ matrix-based neural repair of spinal cord injury. Biomaterials, 2021; 279:121192.
22.
GuoS, RedenskiI, LevenbergS. Spinal cord repair: From cells and tissue engineering to. Cells, 2021; 10(1872):1–19.
23.
BuckenmeyerMJ, MederTJ, PrestTA, et al.Decellularization techniques and their applications for the repair and regeneration of the nervous system. Methods, 2020; 171:41–61; doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2019.07.023
24.
GranatoAEC, da CruzEF, Rodrigues-JuniorDM, et al.A novel decellularization method to produce brain scaffolds. Tissue Cell, 2020; 67:101412; doi: 10.1016/j.tice.2020.101412
25.
ZhuT, TangQ, ShenY, et al.An acellular cerebellar biological scaffold: Preparation, characterization, biocompatibility and effects on neural stem cells. Brain Res Bull, 2015; 113:48–57; doi; 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2015.03.003
26.
OzudogruE, IsikM, EylemCC, et al.Decellularized spinal cord meninges extracellular matrix hydrogel that supports neurogenic differentiation and vascular structure formation. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 2021; 15(11):948–963.
27.
ChengJ, LiJ, CaiZ, et al.Decellularization of porcine carotid arteries using low-concentration sodium dodecyl sulfate. Int J Artif Organs, 2021; 44(7):497–508.
NarcisoM, OteroJ, NavajasD, et al.Image-based method to quantify decellularization of tissue sections. Int J Mol Sci, 2021; 22(16):8399–8414.
30.
HusseinKH, ParkKM, KangKS, et al.Biocompatibility evaluation of tissue-engineered decellularized scaffolds for biomedical application. Mater Sci Eng C, 2016; 67:766–778; doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2016.05.068
Chopin-DoroteoM, Mandujano-TinocoEA, KrötzschE. Tailoring of the rheological properties of bioinks to improve bioprinting and bioassembly for tissue replacement. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj, 2021; 1865(2):129782.
33.
LeeM, BaeK, LevinsonC, et al.Nanocomposite bioink exploits dynamic covalent bonds between nanoparticles and polysaccharides for precision bioprinting. Biofabrication, 2020; 12(2):025025.
34.
PösslA, HartzkeD, SchmidtsTM, et al.A targeted rheological bioink development guideline and its systematic correlation with printing behavior. Biofabrication, 2021; 13(3):35021–35037.
35.
LimW, KimGJ, KimHW, et al.Kappa-carrageenan-based dual crosslinkable bioink for extrusion type bioprinting. Polymers, 2020; 12(10):1–15.
36.
ChenN, ZhuK, ZhangYS, et al.Hydrogel bioink with multilayered interfaces improves dispersibility of encapsulated cells in extrusion bioprinting. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2019; 11(34):30585–30595.
37.
MarkstedtK, MantasA, TournierI, et al.3D bioprinting human chondrocytes with nanocellulose-alginate bioink for cartilage tissue engineering applications. Biomacromolecules, 2015; 16(5):1489–1496.
38.
HeH, LiD, LinZ, et al.Temperature-programmable and enzymatically solidifiable gelatin-based bioinks enable facile extrusion bioprinting. Biofabrication, 2020; 12(4):045003.
39.
RathanS, DejobL, SchipaniR, et al.Fiber reinforced cartilage ECM functionalized bioinks for functional cartilage tissue engineering. Adv Healthc Mater, 2019; 8(7):1–11.
40.
KimS, JeongD, LeeH, et al.Succinoglycan dialdehyde-reinforced gelatin hydrogels with toughness and thermal stability. Int J Biol Macromol, 2020; 149:281–289; doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.01.228
41.
SharmaR, KirschR, ValenteKP, et al.Physical and mechanical characterization of fibrin-based bioprinted constructs containing drug-releasing microspheres for neural tissue engineering applications. Processes, 2021; 9(7):1205–1226.
GaoT, GillispieGJ, CopusJS, et al.Optimization of gelatin-alginate composite bioink printability using rheological parameters: A systematic approach. Biofabrication, 2018; 10(3):1–17.
44.
BedirT, UlagS, UstundagCB, et al.3D bioprinting applications in neural tissue engineering for spinal cord injury repair. Mater Sci Eng C, 2020; 110:110741; doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2020.110741
45.
LiZ, HuangS, LiuY, et al.Tuning alginate-gelatin bioink properties by varying solvent and their impact on stem cell behavior. Sci Rep, 2018; 8(1):1–8.
46.
HagenbuchnerJ, NothdurfterD, AusserlechnerMJ. 3D bioprinting: Novel approaches for engineering complex human tissue equivalents and drug testing. Essays Biochem, 2021; 65(3):417.
