Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T02:35:32.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modifying the Properties of Collagen Scaffolds with Microfluidics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

David I Shreiber ,
Harini G Sundararaghavan ,
Minjung Song ,
Vikram Munikoti  and
Kathryn E Uhrich
David I Shreiber
Affiliation:
[email protected], Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Biomedical Engineering, 617 Bowser Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8014, United States, 732-445-3722, 732-445-3753
Harini G Sundararaghavan
Affiliation:
[email protected], Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Biomedical Engineering, United States
Minjung Song
Affiliation:
[email protected], Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Biomedical Engineering, United States
Vikram Munikoti
Affiliation:
[email protected], Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Biomedical Engineering, United States
Kathryn E Uhrich
Affiliation:
[email protected], Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Chemistry and Chemical Biology, United States
Get access

Abstract

It is now well accepted that the mechanical properties and cell adhesion profile of 2D and 3D extracellular matrix molecules combine to dictate cellular fate processes, such as differentiation, migration, proliferation, and apoptosis, through a process generally known as 'mechanotransduction', or the conversion of mechanical signals into a cellular response. The stiffness and adhesion density combine to affect the force balance that exists between an adherent cell and the surrounding substrate. We have established BioMEMS, microfluidic technology to alter the mechanical properties and cell adhesion profile of collagen scaffolds. Using soft lithography, we fabricate elastomeric networks that serve as conduits for the controlled mixing of type I collagen solutions. Our technology enables us to generate reproducible, controlled homogeneous and inhomogeneous microenvironments for 3D cell culture, assays of cell behavior in 3D, and the development of bioartificial tissue equivalents for regenerative and reparative therapies. The adhesivity of collagen is modulated by covalently grafting peptides (such as RGD) or proteins (such as albumin) to soluble collagen molecules with 1- ethyl-3-(3-dimethyl aminopropyl) carbodiimide (EDC), a hetero-bifunctional coupling agent. EDC activates the carboxylic group of collagen and forms an amine bond with the grafting molecule. The grafted collagen self-assembles into a fibrillar gel at physiological temperature and pH with no measurable changes in rheological properties compared to controls. A solution of peptide-grafted collagen is then mixed in microfluidic networks with unaltered collagen to form controlled gradients or other patterns of the two solutions, which immobilize upon self-assembly. Separately or in the same network, the mechanical properties of the collagen gel can be altered regionally by the microfluidic delivery a solution of a cell-tolerated crosslinking agent. We use genipin, which has the unique property of generating crosslinks that autofluoresce. The intensity of the fluorescence correlates with the degree of crosslinking (and thus the mechanical properties) enabling us to monitor and measure changes in mechanical properties dynamically and non-invasively. Lastly, though it requires constant delivery or recirculation, the same networks can be used to impose gradients of soluble factors, such as growth factors and cytokines. Thus, we have developed a platform to examine the response of cells to simultaneous chemotactic, haptotactic, and durotactic gradients in a 3D environment. We are employing this technology to examine the response of neural cells to gradients of biomaterial properties to optimize cues for spinal cord regeneration.

Keywords

biomedicaladhesionbiomimetic (assembly)
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 897: Symposium J – Biomemetic Polymers and Gels , 2005 , 0897-J06-04
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

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

REFERENCES

1. Geiger, B., et al. , Transmembrane crosstalk between the extracellular matrix–cytoskeleton crosstalk. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 2001. 2(11): p. 793–805.Google Scholar
2. Bao, G. and Suresh, S., Cell and molecular mechanics of biological materials. Nat Mater, 2003. 2(11): p. 715–25.Google Scholar
3. Engler, A., et al. , Substrate compliance versus ligand density in cell on gel responses. Biophys J, 2004. 86(1 Pt 1): p. 617–28.Google Scholar
4. Christiansen, D.L., Huang, E.K., and Silver, F.H., Assembly of type I collagen: fusion of fibril subunits and the influence of fibril diameter on mechanical properties. Matrix Biol, 2000. 19(5): p. 409–20.Google Scholar
5. Silver, F.H., Siperko, L.M., and Seehra, G.P., Mechanobiology of force transduction in dermal tissue. Skin Res Technol, 2003. 9(1): p. 3–23.Google Scholar
6. Devireddy, R.V., et al. , Cryopreservation of collagen-based tissue equivalents. I. Effect of freezing in the absence of cryoprotective agents. Tissue Eng, 2003. 9(6): p. 1089–100.Google Scholar
7. Shreiber, D.I., Barocas, V.H., and Tranquillo, R.T., Temporal variations in cell migration and traction during fibroblast-mediated gel compaction. Biophys J, 2003. 84(6): p. 4102–14.Google Scholar
8. Enever, P.A., Shreiber, D.I., and Tranquillo, R.T., A novel implantable collagen gel assay for fibroblast traction and proliferation during wound healing. J Surg Res, 2002. 105(2): p. 160–72.Google Scholar
9. Bromberek, B.A., et al. , Macrophages influence a competition of contact guidance and chemotaxis for fibroblast alignment in a fibrin gel coculture assay. Exp Cell Res, 2002. 275(2): p. 230- 42.Google Scholar
10. Shreiber, D.I., Enever, P.A., and Tranquillo, R.T., Effects of pdgf-bb on rat dermal fibroblast behavior in mechanically stressed and unstressed collagen and fibrin gels. Exp Cell Res, 2001. 266(1): p. 155–66.Google Scholar
11. Whitesides, G.M., et al. , Soft lithography in biology and biochemistry. Annu Rev Biomed Eng, 2001. 3: p. 335–73.Google Scholar
12. Kenis, P.J., et al. , Fabrication inside microchannels using fluid flow. Acc Chem Res, 2000. 33(12): p. 841–7.Google Scholar
13. Barocas, V.H. and Tranquillo, R.T., An anisotropic biphasic theory of tissue-equivalent mechanics: the interplay among cell traction, fibrillar network deformation, fibril alignment, and cell contact guidance. J Biomech Eng, 1997. 119(2): p. 137–45.Google Scholar
14. Thompson, D.M. and Buettner, H.M., Schwann cell response to micropatterned laminin surfaces. Tissue Eng, 2001. 7(3): p. 247–65.Google Scholar
15. Garcia, A.J. and Gallant, N.D., Stick and grip: measurement systems and quantitative analyses of integrin-mediated cell adhesion strength. Cell Biochem Biophys, 2003. 39(1): p. 61–73.Google Scholar
16. Li, Jeon, N., et al. , Neutrophil chemotaxis in linear and complex gradients of interleukin-8 formed in a microfabricated device. Nat Biotechnol, 2002. 20(8): p. 826–30.Google Scholar
17. Casey, M.L. and MacDonald, P.C., Lysyl oxidase (ras recision gene) expression in human amnion: ontogeny and cellular localization. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1997. 82(1): p. 167–72.Google Scholar
18. Quaglino, D., et al. , Extracellular matrix modifications in rat tissues of different ages. Correlations between elastin and collagen type I mRNA expression and lysyl-oxidase activity. Matrix, 1993. 13(6): p. 481–90.Google Scholar
19. Piacentini, M., et al. , ”Tissue” transglutaminase in animal development. Int J Dev Biol, 2000. 44(6): p. 655–62.Google Scholar
20. Nurminskaya, M.V., et al. , Transglutaminase factor XIIIA in the cartilage of developing avian long bones. Dev Dyn, 2002. 223(1): p. 24–32.Google Scholar
21. Girton, T.S., Oegema, T.R., and Tranquillo, R.T., Exploiting glycation to stiffen and strengthen tissue equivalents for tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res, 1999 46(1): p. 87–92.Google Scholar
22. Weadock, K.S., et al. , Physical crosslinking of collagen fibers: comparison of ultraviolet irradiation and dehydrothermal treatment. J Biomed Mater Res, 1995. 29(11): p. 1373–9.Google Scholar
23. Chang, Y., et al. , Acellular bovine pericardia with distinct porous structures fixed with genipin as an extracellular matrix. Tissue Eng, 2004. 10(5–6): p. 881–92.Google Scholar
24. Liang, H.C., et al. , Effects of crosslinking degree of an acellular biological tissue on its tissue regeneration pattern. Biomaterials, 2004. 25(17): p. 3541–52.Google Scholar
25. Sung, H.W., et al. , Stability of a biological tissue fixed with a naturally occurring crosslinking agent (genipin). J Biomed Mater Res, 2001. 55(4): p. 538–46.Google Scholar
26. Sung, H.W., et al. , Crosslinking of biological tissues using genipin and/or carbodiimide. J Biomed Mater Res, 2003. 64A(3): p. 427–38.Google Scholar
27. Liang, H.C., et al. , Genipin-crosslinked gelatin microspheres as a drug carrier for intramuscular administration: in vitro and in vivo studies. J Biomed Mater Res, 2003. 65A(2): p. 271–82.Google Scholar