Chitosan selectively promotes adhesion of myoblasts over fibroblasts

Abstract

Treatment of ventral hernias frequently makes use of synthetic and biological meshes, often resulting in scar tissue formation and incomplete muscle regeneration. Chitosan has been shown to promote a regenerative response than a fibrotic response. The objective of this study is to determine the effects of chitosan on myoblast and fibroblast adhesion and the underlying mechanisms. Primary myoblast cells, embryonic fibroblasts, and 1:1 coculture of both cell types were seeded on chitosan-coated and uncoated tissue culture plates. The number of attached cells was measured at 5, 24, 48, and 72 h after seeding. At 5 h after seeding, expression and structural organization of actin, integrin β3, and integrin β1 were analyzed. With chitosan, primary fibroblasts had 2.7 times smaller F-actin fraction, and more primary myoblasts with higher expression of integrin β3 were seen. Moreover, a higher ratio of myoblasts to fibroblasts was seen with chitosan, with a ratio higher than one at 48 and 72 h after seeding and greater than a twofold increase in ratio when compared with uncoated plates. A higher organization of actin and integrin β3 network around nucleus of myoblasts was observed with chitosan, whereas reorganization in actin and integrin β1 network was observed in fibroblasts. In conclusion, chitosan promotes myoblast adhesion with higher expression of integrin β3 and inhibits fibroblast adhesion with reorganization of actin and integrin β1 network.

Chitosan as a Modifying Component of Artificial Scaffold for Human Skin Tissue Engineering

“…Thus, inhibition of proliferation and adhesion of fi broblasts on pure chitosan and formation of spheroids are not determined by specifi c molecular interactions between cells and chitosan fibers, rather than structural features of chitosan scaffolds. Electrostatic interaction of positively charged deacetylated amino groups of pure chitosan with the cell surface [11] induces specifi c reorganization of integrin β1 on the cell membrane [13]. This can negatively affect both cell adhesion and proliferation [24].…”

Polymer blending or fiber blending: A comparative study using chitosan and poly(ε‐caprolactone) electrospun fibers

“…Of notice is cell adhesion to the CS scaffold, the lowest at 40%, being the difference to all other scaffolds' adhesion rates statistically significant. Cell adhesion to CS scaffolds is known to be an ineffective process . Also interesting is the fact that cell adhesion to all 3 PB scaffolds is similar, in spite of the statistically significant difference between cell adhesion rates to PB31 and PB13 scaffolds.…”

“…Cell adhesion to CS scaffolds is known to be an ineffective process. [30][31][32] Also interesting is the fact that cell adhesion to all 3 PB scaffolds is similar, in spite of the statistically significant difference between cell adhesion rates to PB31 and PB13 scaffolds. Cell adhesion to all three FB shows no statistically significant differences.…”

“…CS nanofibers are widely known for their potential in biomedical and tissue engineering applications . Despite these positive characteristics, cell attachment to unmodified CS is problematic . This characteristic has been explored as an advantage in postoperative adhesion prevention membranes .…”

“…29 Despite these positive characteristics, cell attachment to unmodified CS is problematic. [30][31][32] This characteristic has been explored as an advantage in postoperative adhesion prevention membranes. 33 Due to the inherent poor processability of CS, fiber-forming additives such as PEO are usually introduced.…”