The effect of manipulation of silk scaffold fabrication parameters on matrix performance in a murine model of bladder augmentation

Biomaterials

Volumn 32, Issue 30, 2011, Pages 7562-7570

  Gomez, Pablo ^a,b   Gil, Eun Seok ^c   Lovett, Michael L ^c   Rockwood, Danielle N ^c   Di Vizio, Dolores ^a,b   Kaplan, David L ^c   Adam, Rosalyn M ^a,b   Estrada, Carlos R ^a,b   Mauney, Joshua R ^a,b  

^a BOSTON CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c Tufts University   (United States)

Author keywords

Bladder tissue engineering; Epithelium; Silk; Smooth muscle cell; Urinary tract

Indexed keywords

BASAL CELLS; BLADDER TISSUE; BLADDER TISSUE ENGINEERING; BOMBYX MORI SILK FIBROIN; CONTROL LEVEL; DEFECT SITES; DEGRADATION RATE; EPITHELIUM; FABRICATION PARAMETERS; GEL SPINNING; HIGHER-DEGREE; IN-VIVO; MATRIX; MATRIX GROUPS; MURINE MODEL; PARALLEL EVALUATION; PROCESSING PARAMETERS; PROTEIN EXPRESSIONS; SCAFFOLD DEGRADATION; SILK SCAFFOLD; SLEW RATE; SMOOTH MUSCLE ACTINS; SMOOTH MUSCLE CELLS; SMOOTH MUSCLES; STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES; URINARY TRACT;

ANIMALS; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; BIOMECHANICS; DEGRADATION; FABRICATION; GELS; MECHANICAL PROPERTIES; METHANOL; MUSCLE; PROTEINS; SILK; SPINNING (FIBERS); WINDING;

SCAFFOLDS (BIOLOGY);

ALPHA SMOOTH MUSCLE ACTIN; METHANOL; PROTEIN P63; SILK SCAFFOLD; TISSUE SCAFFOLD; TRANSGELIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; UROPLAKIN;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BLADDER COMPLIANCE; BLADDER FUNCTION; CELL MATURATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYSTOMETRY; DEGRADATION; EPITHELIUM CELL; FREEZE DRYING; HISTOLOGY; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; IMPLANTATION; IN VIVO STUDY; MICTURITION; MOUSE; MUSCLE REGENERATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SMOOTH MUSCLE; TISSUE REGENERATION;

ANIMALS; BOMBYX; MICE; MUSCLE, SMOOTH; REGENERATION; SILK; TISSUE ENGINEERING; TISSUE SCAFFOLDS; URINARY BLADDER;

ANIMALIA; BOMBYX MORI; MURINAE;

EID: 80051550329     PISSN: 01429612     EISSN: 18785905     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.06.067     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Atala A. Tissue engineering for bladder substitution. World J Urol 2000, 18(5):364-370.
2. Hatch D.A., Koyle M.A., Baskin L.S., Zaontz M.R., Burns M.W., Tarry W.F., et al. Kidney transplantation in children with urinary diversion or bladder augmentation. J Urol 2001, 165(6):2265-2268.
3. Schettini M. Orthotopic neo-bladder in women. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2010, 82(4):170-172.
4. Niknejad K.G., Atala A. Bladder augmentation techniques in women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2000, 11(3):156-169.
5. Somani B.K., Kumar V., Wong S., Pickard R., Ramsay C., Nabi G., et al. Bowel dysfunction after transposition of intestinal segments into the urinary tract: 8-year prospective cohort study. J Urol 2007, 177(5):1793-1798.
6. Hensle T.W., Gilbert S.M. A review of metabolic consequences and long-term complications of enterocystoplasty in children. Curr Urol Rep 2007, 8(2):157-162.
7. Atala A. Tissue engineering of human bladder. Br Med Bull 2011, 97(1):81-104.
8. Roth C.C., Kropp B.P. Recent advances in urologic tissue engineering. Curr Urol Rep 2009, 10(2):119-125.
9. Kropp B.P. Small-intestinal submucosa for bladder augmentation: a review of preclinical studies. World J Urol 1998, 16(4):262-267.
10. Yang B., Zhang Y., Zhou L., Sun Z., Zheng J., Chen Y., et al. Development of a porcine bladder acellular matrix with well-preserved extracellular bioactive factors for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part C 2010, 16(5):1201-1211.
11. Sharma A.K., Bury M.I., Marks A.J., Fuller N.J., Meisner J.W., Tapaskar N., et al. A non-human primate model for urinary bladder regeneration utilizing autologous sources of bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cells 2011, 29(2):241-250.
12. Chung S.Y., Krivorov N.P., Rausei V., Thomas L., Frantzen M., Landsittel D., et al. Bladder reconstitution with bone marrow derived stem cells seeded on small intestinal submucosa improves morphological and molecular composition. J Urol 2005, 174(1):353-359.
13. Ashley R.A., Roth C.C., Palmer B.W., Kibar Y., Routh J.C., Fung K.M., et al. Regional variations in small intestinal submucosa evoke differences in inflammation with subsequent impact on tissue regeneration in the rat bladder augmentation model. BJU Int 2010, 105(10):1462-1468.
14. Zhang Y., Frimberger D., Cheng E.Y., Lin H.K., Kropp B.P. Challenges in a larger bladder replacement with cell-seeded and unseeded small intestinal submucosa grafts in a subtotal cystectomy model. BJU Int 2006, 98(5):1100-1105.
15. Yang S., Leong K.F., Du Z., Chua C.K. The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. part I. traditional factors. Tissue Eng 2001, 7(6):679-689.
16. Atala A., Bauer S.B., Soker S., Yoo J.J., Retik A.B. Tissue-engineered autologous bladders for patients needing cystoplasty. Lancet 2006, 367(9518):1241-1246.
17. Ceonzo K., Gaynor A., Shaffer L., Kojima K., Vacanti C.A., Stahl G.L. Polyglycolic acid-induced inflammation: role of hydrolysis and resulting complement activation. Tissue Eng 2006, 12(2):301-308.
18. Mauney J.R., Cannon G.M., Lovett M.L., Gong E.M., Di Vizio D., Gomez P., et al. Evaluation of gel spun silk-based biomaterials in a murine model of bladder augmentation. Biomaterials 2011, 32(3):808-818.
19. Meinel L., Hofmann S., Karageorgiou V., Kirker-Head C., McCool J., Gronowicz G., et al. The inflammatory responses to silk films in vitro and in vivo. Biomaterials 2005, 26(2):147-155.
20. Shao Z., Vollrath F. Surprising strength of silkworm silk. Nature 2002, 418(6899):741.
21. Kim U.J., Park J., Kim H.J., Wada M., Kaplan D.L. Three-dimensional aqueous-derived biomaterial scaffolds from silk fibroin. Biomaterials 2005, 26(15):2775-2785.
22. Wang Y., Rudym D.D., Walsh A., Abrahamsen L., Kim H.J., Kim H.S., et al. In vivo degradation of three-dimensional silk fibroin scaffolds. Biomaterials 2008, 29(24-25):3415-3428.
23. Lovett M.L., Cannizzaro C.M., Vunjak-Novakovic G., Kaplan D.L. Gel spinning of silk tubes for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2008, 29(35):4650-4657.
24. Sanz-Herrera J.A., García-Aznar J.M., Doblaré M. On scaffold designing for bone regeneration: a computational multiscale approach. Acta Biomater 2009, 5(1):219-229.
25. Su S.T., Huang H.F., Chang S.F. Encrusted bladder stone on non-absorbable sutures after a cesarean section: a case report. JTUA 2009, 20(3):143-145.
26. Numata K., Cebe P., Kaplan D.L. Mechanism of enzymatic degradation of beta-sheet crystals. Biomaterials 2010, 31(10):2926-2933.
27. Altman G.H., Diaz F., Jakuba C., Calabro T., Horan R.L., Chen J., et al. Silk-based biomaterials. Biomaterials 2003, 24(3):401-416.
28. Wang X., Kim H.J., Xu P., Matsumoto A., Kaplan D.L. Biomaterial coatings by stepwise deposition of silk fibroin. Langmuir 2005, 21(24):11335-11341.
29. Sugino Y., Kanematsu A., Hayashi Y., Haga H., Yoshimura N., Yoshimura K., et al. Voided stain on paper method for analysis of mouse urination. Neurourol Urodyn 2008, 27(6):548-552.
30. Kropp B.P., Rippy M.K., Badylak S.F., Adams M.C., Keating M.A., Rink R.C., et al. Regenerative urinary bladder augmentation using small intestinal submucosa: urodynamic and histopathologic assessment in long-term canine bladder augmentations. J Urol 1996, 155(6):2098-2104.
31. Stylianopoulos T., Bashur C.A., Goldstein A.S., Guelcher S.A., Barocas V.H. Computational predictions of the tensile properties of electrospun fibre meshes: effect of fibre diameter and fibre orientation. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2008, 1(4):326-335.
32. Shen J.B., Wang W., Li J., Guo S.Y., Xu S.X., Li T. Simulation of mechanical properties of multilayered propylene-ethylene copolymer/ethylene 1-octene copolymer composites by equivalent box model and its experimental verification. Eur Polym J 2009, 45(11):3269-3281.
33. Metcalfe P.D., Casale A.J., Kaefer M.A., Misseri R., Dussinger A.M., Meldrum K.K., et al. Spontaneous bladder perforations: a report of 500 augmentations in children and analysis of risk. J Urol 2006, 175(4):1466-1471.
34. Baskin L.S., Hayward S.W., Young P., Cunha G.R. Role of mesenchymal-epithelial interactions in normal bladder development. J Urol 1996, 156(5):1820-1827.
35. Wu H.Y., Baskin L.S., Liu W., Li Y.W., Hayward S., Cunha G.R. Understanding bladder regeneration: smooth muscle ontogeny. J Urol 1999, 162(3):1101-1105.
36. Master V.A., Wei G., Liu W., Baskin L.S. Urothelium facilitates the recruitment and trans-differentiation of fibroblasts into smooth muscle in acellular matrix. Urology 2003, 170(4):1628-1632.
37. Anderson J.M., Rodriguez A., Chang D.T. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin Immunol 2008, 20(2):86-100.
38. de Boer W.I., Schuller A.G., Vermey M., Van der Kwast T.H. Expression of growth factors and receptors during specific phases in regenerating urothelium after acute injury in vivo. Am J Pathol 1994, 145(5):1199-1207.
39. Karni-Schmidt O., Castillo-Martin M., HuaiShen T., Gladoun N., Domingo-Domenech J., Sanchez-Carbayo M., et al. Distinct expression profiles of p63 variants during urothelial development and bladder cancer progression. Am J Pathol 2011, 178(3):1350-1360.
40. Kong X.T., Deng F.M., Hu P., Liang F.X., Zhou G., Auerbach A.B., et al. Roles of uroplakins in plaque formation, umbrella cell enlargement, and urinary tract diseases. J Cell Biol 2004, 167(6):1195-1204.
41. Weston P.M., Robinson L.Q., Williams S., Thomas M., Stephenson T.P. Poor compliance early in filling in the neuropathic bladder. Br J Urol 1989, 63(1):28-31.