Engineered Collagen Matrices

Patil, Vaidehi; Masters, Kristyn S.

doi:10.3390/bioengineering7040163

Cited by 46 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 171 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Collagen-based biomaterials are shown to have advantages over other biomaterials and are therefore used in various tissue-engineering applications ( Patil and Masters, 2020 ). Since collagen is the most abundant protein in the human body and a major component of bone and periodontal connective tissue, it appears chemotactic for various cell types ( Farndale et al, 2004 ; Rothamel et al, 2004 ; Thibault et al, 2007 ; Lin et al, 2020 ), in addition to its prominent role in coagulum formation ( Farndale et al, 2004 ; Kumar et al, 2014 ; Asparuhova et al, 2021 ) and angiogenesis at wounded sites ( Twardowski et al, 2007 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive Effects of Three-Dimensional Collagen-Based Matrices on the Behavior of Osteoprogenitors

Lin

Nica

Sculean

et al. 2021

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has demonstrated that reinforced three-dimensional (3D) collagen matrices can provide a stable scaffold for restoring the lost volume of a deficient alveolar bone. In the present study, we aimed to comparatively investigate the migratory, adhesive, proliferative, and differentiation potential of mesenchymal stromal ST2 and pre-osteoblastic MC3T3-E1 cells in response to four 3D collagen-based matrices. Dried acellular dermal matrix (DADM), hydrated acellular dermal matrix (HADM), non-crosslinked collagen matrix (NCM), and crosslinked collagen matrix (CCM) did all enhance the motility of the osteoprogenitor cells. Compared to DADM and NCM, HADM and CCM triggered stronger migratory response. While cells grown on DADM and NCM demonstrated proliferative rates comparable to control cells grown in the absence of a biomaterial, cells grown on HADM and CCM proliferated significantly faster. The pro-proliferative effects of the two matrices were supported by upregulated expression of genes regulating cell division. Increased expression of genes encoding the adhesive molecules fibronectin, vinculin, CD44 antigen, and the intracellular adhesive molecule-1 was detected in cells grown on each of the scaffolds, suggesting excellent adhesive properties of the investigated biomaterials. In contrast to genes encoding the bone matrix proteins collagen type I (Col1a1) and osteopontin (Spp1) induced by all matrices, the expression of the osteogenic differentiation markers Runx2, Alpl, Dlx5, Ibsp, Bglap2, and Phex was significantly increased in cells grown on HADM and CCM only. Short/clinically relevant pre-coating of the 3D biomaterials with enamel matrix derivative (EMD) or recombinant bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rBMP-2) significantly boosted the osteogenic differentiation of both osteoprogenitor lines on all matrices, including DADM and NCM, indicating that EMD and BMP-2 retained their biological activity after being released from the matrices. Whereas EMD triggered the expression of all osteogenesis-related genes, rBMP-2 upregulated early, intermediate, and late osteogenic differentiation markers except for Col1a1 and Spp1. Altogether, our results support favorable influence of HADM and CCM on the recruitment, growth, and osteogenic differentiation of the osteoprogenitor cell types. Furthermore, our data strongly support the biofunctionalization of the collagen-based matrices with EMD or rBMP-2 as a potential treatment modality for bone defects in the clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive Effects of Three-Dimensional Collagen-Based Matrices on the Behavior of Osteoprogenitors

Lin

Nica

Sculean

et al. 2021

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The native ECM contains proteins such as collagen and elastin, which provide structural and functional cues to resident cells. However, many sources of natural protein biomaterials are animal-derived [ 65 , 66 , 67 ]. Synthetic peptide biomaterials have made significant progress in mimicking the structural and functional cues of native proteins and may provide an alternative to many naturally derived proteins [ 111 , 112 ].…”

Section: A Brief History Of Peptide Hydrogels As Biomaterialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Historically, lab-made scaffolds have been synthesised from modified proteins or long-chain polysaccharides [ 62 , 63 , 64 ]. However, protein materials sourced from animals suffer from batch-to-batch inconsistency and xenogeneic protein transfer issues, limiting translation to clinical settings [ 65 , 66 , 67 ]. Inconsistencies in cell-scaffold interactions and biofabrication outcomes undermine the use of natural protein and polysaccharide materials for tissue engineering.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing Peptide Biomaterials for Biofabrication

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biofabrication using well-matched cell/materials systems provides unprecedented opportunities for dealing with human health issues where disease or injury overtake the body’s native regenerative abilities. Such opportunities can be enhanced through the development of biomaterials with cues that appropriately influence embedded cells into forming functional tissues and organs. In this context, biomaterials’ reliance on rigid biofabrication techniques needs to support the incorporation of a hierarchical mimicry of local and bulk biological cues that mimic the key functional components of native extracellular matrix. Advances in synthetic self-assembling peptide biomaterials promise to produce reproducible mimics of tissue-specific structures and may go some way in overcoming batch inconsistency issues of naturally sourced materials. Recent work in this area has demonstrated biofabrication with self-assembling peptide biomaterials with unique biofabrication technologies to support structural fidelity upon 3D patterning. The use of synthetic self-assembling peptide biomaterials is a growing field that has demonstrated applicability in dermal, intestinal, muscle, cancer and stem cell tissue engineering.

show abstract

“…For delivery and containment of the MSCs at the site of a cartilage defect, as well as in order to ensure vital activities of the cells over the time sufficient to trigger cartilage tissue repair processes, bioresorbable carriers (scaffolds or matrices) are used [ 8 ], which are mainly based on collagen [ 9 ]. Two types of collagen-based carriers, ECM biomimetics, are known that are suitable for minimally invasive intra-articular administration: a hydrogel scaffold derived from ECM components [ 10 ] and a finely dispersed scaffold of decellularized ECM [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The purpose of this work was to compare the effects of two types of microdispersed matrices on chondrogenic differentiation of the MSCs of human adipose tissue in vitro and on the processes of articular cartilage regeneration in an experimental model of rabbit knee osteoarthrosis (OA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Capacity of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Cartilage Regeneration Depending on Collagen-Based Injectable Biomimetic Scaffold Type

Sevastianov

Basok

Кирсанова

et al. 2021

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have shown a high potential for cartilage repair. Collagen-based scaffolds are used to deliver and retain cells at the site of cartilage damage. The aim of the work was a comparative analysis of the capacity of the MSCs from human adipose tissue to differentiate into chondrocytes in vitro and to stimulate the regeneration of articular cartilage in an experimental model of rabbit knee osteoarthrosis when cultured on microheterogenic collagen-based hydrogel (MCH) and the microparticles of decellularized porcine articular cartilage (DPC). The morphology of samples was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy and histological staining methods. On the surface of the DPC, the cells were distributed more uniformly than on the MCH surface. On day 28, the cells cultured on the DPC produced glycosaminoglycans more intensely compared to the MCH with the synthesis of collagen type II. However, in the experimental model of osteoarthrosis, the stimulation of the cartilage regeneration was more effective when the MSCs were administered to the MCH carrier. The present study demonstrates the way to regulate the action of the MSCs in the area of cartilage regeneration: the MCH is more conducive to stimulating cartilage repair by the MSCs, while the DPC is an inducer for a formation of a cartilage-like tissue by the MSCs in vitro.

show abstract

Engineered Collagen Matrices

Cited by 46 publications

References 171 publications

Positive Effects of Three-Dimensional Collagen-Based Matrices on the Behavior of Osteoprogenitors

Positive Effects of Three-Dimensional Collagen-Based Matrices on the Behavior of Osteoprogenitors

Enhancing Peptide Biomaterials for Biofabrication

A Comparison of the Capacity of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Cartilage Regeneration Depending on Collagen-Based Injectable Biomimetic Scaffold Type

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About