Three-dimensional printed bone scaffolds: The role of nano/micro-hydroxyapatite particles on the adhesion and differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2017
Three-dimensional printed bone scaffolds: The role of nano/micro-hydroxyapatite particles on the adhesion and differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells
Bone tissue engineering is strongly dependent on the use of three-dimensional scaffolds that can act as templates to accommodate cells and support tissue ingrowth. Despite its wide application in tissue engineering research, polycaprolactone presents a very limited ability to induce adhesion, proliferation and osteogenic cell differentiation. To overcome some of these limitations, different calcium phosphates, such as hydroxyapatite and tricalcium phosphate, have been employed with relative success. This work investigates the influence of nano-hydroxyapatite and micro-hydroxyapatite (nHA and mHA, respectively) particles on the in vitro biomechanical performance of polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffolds. Morphological analysis performed with scanning electron microscopy allowed us to confirm the production of polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite constructs with square interconnected pores of approximately 350 µm and to assess the distribution of hydroxyapatite particles within the polymer matrix. Compression mechanical tests showed an increase in polycaprolactone compressive modulus (E) from 105.5 ± 11.2 to 138.8 ± 12.9 MPa (PCL_nHA) and 217.2 ± 21.8 MPa (PCL_mHA). In comparison to PCL_mHA scaffolds, the addition of nano-hydroxyapatite enhanced the adhesion and viability of human mesenchymal stem cells as confirmed by Alamar Blue assay. In addition, after 14 days of incubation, PCL_nHA scaffolds showed higher levels of alkaline phosphatase activity compared to polycaprolactone or PCL_mHA structures.
LeeJFaragMMParkEK. A simultaneous process of 3D magnesium phosphate scaffold fabrication and bioactive substance loading for hard tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl2014; 36: 252–260.
2.
LichtePPapeHCPufeT. Scaffolds for bone healing: concepts, materials and evidence. Injury2011; 42: 569–573.
3.
OryanAAlidatiSMoshiriA. Bone regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, and future directions. J Orthop Surg Res2014; 9: 18–45.
4.
ArvidsonKAbdallahBMApplegateLA. Bone regeneration and stem cells. J Cell Mol Med2011; 15: 718–746.
5.
YaszemskiMJOldhamJBLuL. Clinical needs for bone tissue engineering technology. In: DaviesJE (ed.) Bone engineering. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto, 2000, pp.541–547.
6.
SpitzerRPerkaCLindenhaynK. Matrix engineering for osteogenic differentiation of rabbit periosteal cells using α-tricalcium phosphate particles in a three-dimensional fibrin culture. J Biomed Mater Res A2002; 59: 690–696.
7.
SimonGCKhatriCAWightSA. Preliminary report on the biocompatibility of a moldable, resorbable, composite bone graft consisting of calcium phosphate cement and poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres. J Orthop Res2002; 20: 473–482.
8.
RoseFROreffoRO.Bone tissue engineering: hope vs hype. Biochem Biophys Res Commun2002; 292: 1–7.
9.
PetiteHViateauVBensaidW. Tissue-engineered bone regeneration. Nat Biotechnol2000; 18: 959–963.
10.
PerryCR.Bone repair techniques, bone graft, and bone graft substitutes. Clin Orthop Relat Res1999; 360: 71–86.
11.
WilliamsDF. Perspectives on the contributions of biomaterials and tissue engineering to bone repair, reconstruction and regeneration. In: DaviesJE (ed.) Bone engineering. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto, 2000, pp.577–584.
12.
SetoIAsahinaIOdaM. Reconstruction of the primate mandible with a combination graft of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and bone marrow. J Oral Maxillofac Surg2001; 59: 53–61.
13.
FinkemeierCG.Bone-grafting and bone-graft substitutes. J Bone Joint Surg2002; 84: 454–464.
14.
KhanSNTominELaneJM.Clinical applications of bone graft substitutes. Orthop Clin North Am2000; 31: 389–398.
15.
MelchelsFPWDomingosMANKleinTJ. Additive manufacturing of tissues and organs. Prog Polym Sci2012; 37: 1079–1104.
16.
LeeSHShinH.Matrices and scaffolds for delivery of bioactive molecules in bone and cartilage tissue engineering. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2007; 59: 339–359.
17.
AndersonEJTateMLK. Design of tissue engineering scaffolds as delivery devices for mechanical and mechanically modulated signals. Tissue Eng2007; 13: 2525–2538.
18.
ArafatMTLamCXFEkaputraAK. High performance additive manufactured scaffolds for bone tissue engineering application. Soft Matter2011; 7: 8013–8022.
19.
LinFYanCZhengW. Preparation of mesoporous bioglass coated zirconia scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Adv Mat Res2011; 365: 209–215.
20.
RathSNArkudasALamCXF. Development of a pre-vascularized 3D scaffold-hydrogel composite graft using an arterio-venous loop for tissue engineering applications. J Biomater Appl2011; 27: 277–289.
21.
KolambkarYMDupontKMBoerckelJD. An alginate-based hybrid system for growth factor delivery in the functional repair of large bone defects. Biomaterials2011; 32: 65–74.
22.
WilliamsJMAdewunmiASchekRM. Bone tissue engineering using polycaprolactone scaffolds fabricated via selective laser sintering. Biomaterials2005; 26: 4817–4827.
23.
CaoHKuboyamaN.A biodegradable porous composite scaffold of PGA/β-TCP for bone tissue engineering. Bone2010; 46: 386–395.
24.
XiongZYanYZhangR. Fabrication of porous poly(L-lactic acid) scaffolds for bone tissue engineering via precise extrusion. Scripta Mater2001; 45: 773–779.
25.
DomingosMChielliniFCometaS. Evaluation of in vitro degradation of PCL scaffolds fabricated via BioExtrusion: part 1. Influence of degradation environment. Virtual Phys Prototyp2010; 5: 65–73.
26.
PatricioTDomingosMGloriaA. Fabrication and characterisation of PCL and PCL/PLA scaffolds for tissue engineering. Rapid Prototyping J2014; 2: 145–156.
27.
WoodruffMAHutmacherDW.The return of a forgotten polymer – polycaprolactone in the 21st century. Prog Polym Sci2010; 35: 1217–1256.
28.
RichJJaakkolaTTirriT.In vitro evaluation of poly(ε-caprolactone-co-DL-lactide)/bioactive glass composites. Biomaterials2002; 23: 2143–2150.
29.
KimHWJonathanC.Hydroxyapatite/PCL composite coatings on hydroxyapatite porous bone scaffold for drug delivery. Biomaterials2004; 25: 1279–1287.
30.
BidicSMCalvertJWMarraK. Rabbit calvarial wound healing by means of seeded caprotite scaffolds. J Dent Res2003; 82: 131–135.
31.
FiniMGiavaresiGAldiniNN. A bone substitute composed of polymethylmethacrylate and α-tricalcium phosphate: results in terms of osteoblast function and bone tissue formation. Biomaterials2002; 23: 4523–4531.
32.
PeterSJLuLKimDJ. Marrow stromal osteoblast function on a poly(propylene fumarate)/β-tricalcium phosphate biodegradable orthopaedic composite. Biomaterials2000; 21: 1207–1213.
ZhouYHutmacherDWVarawanSL. In vitro bone engineering based on polycaprolactone and polycaprolactone–tricalcium phosphate composites. Polym Int2007; 56: 333–342.
35.
SchantzJTBrandwoodAHutmacherDW. Osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal progenitor cells in computer designed fibrin-polymer-ceramic scaffolds manufactured by fused deposition modeling. J Mater Sci Mater Med2005; 16: 807–819.
36.
HongZReisRLManoJF.Preparation and in vitro characterization of scaffolds of poly(l-lactic acid) containing bioactive glass ceramic nanoparticles. Acta Biomater2008; 4: 1297–1306.
37.
DouglasTPamulaEHaukD. Porous polymer/hydroxyapatite scaffolds: characterization and biocompatibility investigations. J Mater Sci Mater Med2009; 20: 1909–1915.
38.
HeoSJKimSEWeiJ. Fabrication and characterization of novel nano- and micro-HA/PCL composite scaffolds using a modified rapid prototyping process. J Biomed Mater Res A2009; 89: 108–116.
39.
HeoSJKimSEHyunYT. In vitro evaluation of poly ε-caprolactone/hydroxyapatite composite as scaffolds for bone tissue engineering with human bone marrow stromal cells. Key Eng Mater2007; 342–343: 369–372.
40.
DomingosMIntranuovoFRussoT. The first systematic analysis of 3D rapid prototyped poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds manufactured through BioCell printing: the effect of pore size and geometry on compressive mechanical behaviour and in vitro hMSC viability. Biofabrication2013; 5: 045004.
41.
BártoloPDomingosMGloriaA. BioCell printing: integrated automated assembly system for tissue engineering constructs. CIRP Ann: Manuf Techn2011; 60: 271–274.
42.
DomingosMIntranuovoFGloriaA. Improved osteoblast cell affinity on plasma-modified 3D extruded PCL scaffolds. Acta Biomater2013; 9: 5997–6005.
43.
RussoTGloriaAD-AntòV. Poly(ε-caprolactone) reinforced with sol-gel synthesized organic-inorganic hybrid fillers as composite substrates for tissue engineering. J Appl Biomater Biomech2010; 8: 146–152.
44.
ShorLGuçeriSWenX. Fabrication of three-dimensional polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite tissue scaffolds and osteoblast-scaffold interactions in vitro. Biomaterials2007; 28: 5291–5297.
45.
De SantisRRussoAGloriaA. Towards the design of 3D fiber-deposited poly(ε-caprolactone)/iron-doped hydroxyapatite nanocomposite magnetic scaffolds for bone regeneration. J Biomed Nanotechnol2015; 11: 1236–1246.
