A flow perfusion bioreactor with controlled mechanical stimulation: Application in cartilage tissue engineering and beyond

Nazempour, Arshan; Wie, Bernard J. Van

doi:10.29328/journal.jsctt.1001011

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 116 publications

(125 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also important to note that these bioreactor systems are very complex for use in large-scale production and/or high throughput uses, which has hindered their wider application. Therefore, given the complex demands of OCTE, combinations of distinct bioreactors types have been explored to better mimic the OC physiological environment in vitro, including compression bioreactors combined with perfusion [ 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 ].…”

Section: Osteochondral Tissue Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

Gonçalves¹,

Moreira²,

Weber

et al. 2021

Pharmaceutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The socioeconomic impact of osteochondral (OC) damage has been increasing steadily over time in the global population, and the promise of tissue engineering in generating biomimetic tissues replicating the physiological OC environment and architecture has been falling short of its projected potential. The most recent advances in OC tissue engineering are summarised in this work, with a focus on electrospun and 3D printed biomaterials combined with stem cells and biochemical stimuli, to identify what is causing this pitfall between the bench and the patients’ bedside. Even though significant progress has been achieved in electrospinning, 3D-(bio)printing, and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technologies, it is still challenging to artificially emulate the OC interface and achieve complete regeneration of bone and cartilage tissues. Their intricate architecture and the need for tight spatiotemporal control of cellular and biochemical cues hinder the attainment of long-term functional integration of tissue-engineered constructs. Moreover, this complexity and the high variability in experimental conditions used in different studies undermine the scalability and reproducibility of prospective regenerative medicine solutions. It is clear that further development of standardised, integrative, and economically viable methods regarding scaffold production, cell selection, and additional biochemical and biomechanical stimulation is likely to be the key to accelerate the clinical translation and fill the gap in OC treatment.

show abstract

Section: Osteochondral Tissue Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

Gonçalves¹,

Moreira²,

Weber

et al. 2021

Pharmaceutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Review of the Role of Bioreactors for iPSCs-Based Tissue-Engineered Articular Cartilage

Reina-Mahecha,

Beers,

van der Veen

et al. 2023

Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common degenerative joint disease without an ultimate treatment. In a search for novel approaches, tissue engineering (TE) has shown great potential to be an effective way for hyaline cartilage regeneration and repair in advanced stages of OA. Recently, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have been appointed to be essential stem cells for degenerative disease treatment because they allow a personalized medicine approach. For clinical translation, bioreactors in combination with iPSCs-engineerd cartilage could match patients needs, serve as platform for large-scale patient specific cartilage production, and be a tool for patient OA modelling and drug screening. Furthermore, to minimize in vivo experiments and improve cell differentiation and cartilage extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition, TE combines existing approaches with bioreactors. Methods: This review summarizes the current understanding of bioreactors and the necessary parameters when they are intended for cartilage TE, focusing on the potential use of iPSCs. Results: Bioreactors intended for cartilage TE must resemble the joint cavity niche. However, recreating human synovial joints is not trivial because the interactions between various stimuli are not entirely understood. Conclusion: The use of mechanical and electrical stimulation to differentiate iPSCs, and maintain and test chondrocytes are key stimuli influencing hyaline cartilage homeostasis. Incorporating these stimuli to bioreactors can positively impact cartilage TE approaches and their possibility for posterior translation into the clinics.

show abstract

Bioreactors in tissue engineering: mimicking the microenvironment

Bayır

Sahinler

Celtikoglu

et al. 2020

Biomaterials for Organ and Tissue Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A flow perfusion bioreactor with controlled mechanical stimulation: Application in cartilage tissue engineering and beyond

Cited by 4 publications

References 116 publications

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: The Potential of Electrospinning and Additive Manufacturing

A Review of the Role of Bioreactors for iPSCs-Based Tissue-Engineered Articular Cartilage

Bioreactors in tissue engineering: mimicking the microenvironment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About