Chitosan microparticles as injectable scaffolds for tissue engineering

Cruz, Dunia M. García; Ivirico, Jorge L. Escobar; Gomes, Manuela E.; Ribelles, J.L. Gómez; Salmerón-Sánchez, Manuel; Reis, Rui L.; Mano, João F.

doi:10.1002/term.106

Cited by 65 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our previous studies involving MSCs isolated from mice showed an increase in cell count over a period of 28 days, due to proliferation. Another recent study evaluated the in vitro cell viability and morphology in a 3D construct made by combining goat bone marrow stromal cells and CS MPs, which were crosslinked with genipin (García Cruz et al , 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of cross-linked chitosan microparticles for bone regeneration

Bhat

Dreifke

Kandimalla

et al. 2010

J Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this preliminary study was to evaluate the applying of chitosan (CS)-based microparticles (MPs) in bone regeneration in vivo. The CS MPs were fabricated using our scale-up method, as previously described. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) were harvested from the femora and tibiae of Dark Agouti (DA) rats and seeded on CS MPs. An in vitro MSCs attachment experiment was conducted by trypsinizing the cells attached to the MPs at 5, 10, 20 and 30 h. Fluorescence images of MSCs attached to the MPs were taken at 24 and 48 h, using a LIVE/DEAD cell assay. The MSC/osteoblasts (OB) seeded on MPs were then cultured in vitro using osteogenic media and implanted into partial thickness bone defects in rat femurs. There were two groups of rats, including experimental animals and controls, for the in vivo studies. The experimental group were implanted with MSC-seeded MPs and observed at 4 and 8 weeks. The control group of rats did not receive any implant material except the stainless steel plate to support the defect. Four rats per group were used for the study. The femurs were extracted at 4 and 8 weeks post-implantation and bone formation at the defect site was analysed using radiography, microcomputed tomography (µCT) and histology. Among all groups, a significant increase in bone formation was observed in the experimental group at 8 weeks implantation. The results of this study suggested that CS MPs prove to be a successful biomaterial for bone regeneration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of cross-linked chitosan microparticles for bone regeneration

Bhat

Dreifke

Kandimalla

et al. 2010

J Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chitosan microparticles crosslinked with genipin and seeded with goat marrow stromal cells (GBMCs) in a 3D construct were shown to provide feasibility as injectable scaffolds after evaluation of cellular viability at 7 and 14 days in vitro , paving the way for injectable applications [25]. More recently, injectable microspheres have been demonstrated in vivo in rats.…”

Section: Types Of Bioactive 3d Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioactive polymeric scaffolds for tissue engineering

Stratton

Shelke

Hoshino

et al. 2016

Bioactive Materials

371

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A variety of engineered scaffolds have been created for tissue engineering using polymers, ceramics and their composites. Biomimicry has been adopted for majority of the three-dimensional (3D) scaffold design both in terms of physicochemical properties, as well as bioactivity for superior tissue regeneration. Scaffolds fabricated via salt leaching, particle sintering, hydrogels and lithography have been successful in promoting cell growth in vitro and tissue regeneration in vivo. Scaffold systems derived from decellularization of whole organs or tissues has been popular due to their assured biocompatibility and bioactivity. Traditional scaffold fabrication techniques often failed to create intricate structures with greater resolution, not reproducible and involved multiple steps. The 3D printing technology overcome several limitations of the traditional techniques and made it easier to adopt several thermoplastics and hydrogels to create micro-nanostructured scaffolds and devices for tissue engineering and drug delivery. This review highlights scaffold fabrication methodologies with a focus on optimizing scaffold performance through the matrix pores, bioactivity and degradation rate to enable tissue regeneration. Review highlights few examples of bioactive scaffold mediated nerve, muscle, tendon/ligament and bone regeneration. Regardless of the efforts required for optimization, a shift in 3D scaffold uses from the laboratory into everyday life is expected in the near future as some of the methods discussed in this review become more streamlined.

show abstract

“…CHT has been proved to be a biodegradable and biocompatible material and has been proposed for cartilage regeneration. Although many works demonstrated good biocompatibility of CHT scaffolds (García Cruz et al, ; Lao, Tan, Wang, & Gao, ; Lastra, Molinuevo, Blaszczyk‐Lezak, Mijangos, & Cortizo, ; Lastra, Molinuevo, Cortizo, & Cortizo, ), others have reported increased inflammatory response of CHT materials when macrophages were studied (Almeida et al, ; Bitencourt Cda, Silva, Pereira, Gelfuso, & Faccioli, ). This is why the possible inflammatory response was investigated using a model of RAW264.7 macrophages in culture in the presence of PLLA and/or CHT microspheres before implantation in animals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cell‐free approach with a supporting biomaterial in the form of dispersed microspheres induces hyaline cartilage formation in a rabbit knee model

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to test a regenerative medicine strategy for the regeneration of articular cartilage. This approach combines microfracture of the subchondral bone with the implant at the site of the cartilage defect of a supporting biomaterial in the form of microspheres aimed at creating an adequate biomechanical environment for the differentiation of the mesenchymal stem cells that migrate from the bone marrow. The possible inflammatory response to these biomaterials was previously studied by means of the culture of RAW264.7 macrophages. The microspheres were implanted in a 3 mm‐diameter defect in the trochlea of the femoral condyle of New Zealand rabbits, covering them with a poly(l‐lactic acid) (PLLA) membrane manufactured by electrospinning. Experimental groups included a group where exclusively PLLA microspheres were implanted, another group where a mixture of 50/50 microspheres of PLLA (hydrophobic and rigid) and others of chitosan (a hydrogel) were used, and a third group used as a control where no material was used and only the membrane was covering the defect. The histological characteristics of the regenerated tissue have been evaluated 3 months after the operation. We found that during the regeneration process the microspheres, and the membrane covering them, are displaced by the neoformed tissue in the regeneration space toward the subchondral bone region, leaving room for the formation of a tissue with the characteristics of hyaline cartilage.

show abstract

Chitosan microparticles as injectable scaffolds for tissue engineering

Cited by 65 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluation of cross-linked chitosan microparticles for bone regeneration

Evaluation of cross-linked chitosan microparticles for bone regeneration

Bioactive polymeric scaffolds for tissue engineering

A cell‐free approach with a supporting biomaterial in the form of dispersed microspheres induces hyaline cartilage formation in a rabbit knee model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About