Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:42:33.601Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fiber Based Tissue Engineered Scaffolds for Musculoskeletal Applications: in Vitro Cellular Response

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Cato T. Laurencin ,
Frank K. Ko ,
Mark D. Borden ,
James A. Cooper Jr. ,
Wan-Ju Li  and
Mohamed A. Attawia
Cato T. Laurencin
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical EngineeringDrexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104 Department of Materials EngineeringDrexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104 School of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, MCP/Hahneman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA To whom correspondence should be addressed: Department of Chemical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104
Frank K. Ko
Affiliation:
Department of Materials EngineeringDrexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104 School of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104
Mark D. Borden
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104
James A. Cooper Jr.
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104
Wan-Ju Li
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut St., Philadelphia PA, 19104
Mohamed A. Attawia
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, MCP/Hahneman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
Get access

Abstract

The architecture of an engineered scaffold is an important consideration in the design of a synthetic tissue replacement. We have begun to explore the use of heirarchical fiber scale design ranging from microscale nonwoven to 3-D integrated fiber bundles in orthopaedic tissue engineering applications. The use of heirarchical fiber and design includes the following advantages: 1) the ability to tailor a broad spectrum of substrates with a wide range of mechanical properties, and 2) the ability to create structures capable of supporting cell proliferation as well as the micro-diffusion of nutrients throughout the structure. Using the bioresorbable copolymer, poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) [PLAGA], we have fabricated two matrices based on fiber technology: 1) a microfiber non-woven mesh composed of 50:50 PLAGA and 2) a 3-dimensional braided structure composed of 5:95 PLAGA. These structures were examined by scanning electron microscopy [SEM] in an in vitro cell culture environment. Matrices were seeded with two types of cells (osteoblasts from neonatal rat calvaria and fibroblasts from the BALB/C cell line) to determine the effect of matrix architecture on cellular morphology and proliferation. SEM analysis of the microfiber matrix indicated a highly porous, structure resulting from the random arrangement of the microfibers. PLAGA fibers appear to have a range in diameter from approximately 2-7 μm. The 3-D braided matrix was shown to have a organized fibrous structure resulting from the 3-D braiding process. Examination of the attachment and proliferation of cells on the matrices revealed that cell morphology and proliferation patterns were dependent on cell type and matrix geometry. SEM analysis also indicated that cells responded dynamically to changes in structure due to the onset of degradation.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 550: Symposium GG/HH/II – Biomedical Materials-Drug Delivery, Implants and Tissue Engr , 1998 , 127
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Langer, R., and Vacanti, J.P.. Science. 260, 920 (1993).Google Scholar
2. Friedman, O.H., Sherman, J.M. et al. Clin. Ortho. 196, 9, (1985).Google Scholar
3. Jackson, G.E., Windler, R., and Simon, T.M.. Amer. J. Sports Med 18, 1, (1990).Google Scholar
4. Gadzag, A.R., Lane, J.M., Glaser, D., Forster, R.A.. J Amer. Acad. Ortho. Surg. 3, 1 (1995).Google Scholar
5. Shino, M., Inoue, S. et al. J. Bone and Joint Surg. 70B, 556 (1988).Google Scholar
6. Jackson, D.W., Heinrich, J.T., Timothy, M., and Simon, M.S.. Arthroscopy 10, 442, (1994).Google Scholar
7. Attawia, M.A., Devin, J.E., and Laurencin, C.T.. J. Biomed Mater. Res. 29, 843 (1995).Google Scholar
8. Cornell, C.N.. Tech. in Orthop. 7, 55 (1992).Google Scholar
9. Jackson, D.W., Ed. The Anterior Cruciate Ligament: Current and Future Concepts. (Raven Press: New York; 1993).Google Scholar
10. Frank, C.B., Woo, S.L.-Y., Andriacchi, T. et al. Injury and Repair of the Musculoskeletal Soft Tissues. edited by Woo, S.L.Y., and Buckwalter, J.A.. (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Park Ridge, 1988), p. 45.Google Scholar
11. Lanza, R.P., Langer, R., and Chick, W.L., Eds, Principles of Tissue Engineering. (R.G. Landes Company and Academic Press, Inc.; 1997).Google Scholar
12. Doshi, J. and Reneker, D.. J of Electrostatics. 35, 151 (1995).Google Scholar
13. Ko, F.K.. “Three Dimensional Fabrics for Composites” in Textile Structural Composites. Edited by Chou, T.W. and Ko, F.K. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989).Google Scholar
14. Dzenis, Y.A. and Reneker, D.H.. Proceeding of the American Society for Composites Ninth Technical Conference. Sept 20-22, 657 (1994).Google Scholar
15. Jarcho, M.. Clin. Ortho. 157, 259 (1981).Google Scholar