Description of a novel approach to engineer cartilage with porous bacterial nanocellulose for reconstruction of a human auricle

Journal of Biomaterials Applications

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 626-640

  Feldmann, Eva Maria ^a   Sundberg, J F ^b   Bobbili, B ^b   Schwarz, S ^a   Gatenholm, P ^b   Rotter, N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ULM   (Germany)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

auricular reconstruction; bacterial nanocellulose scaffolds; Human primary nasal and auricular chondrocytes

Indexed keywords

AURICULAR CHONDROCYTES; CHONDROGENIC PHENOTYPES; EXTRACELLULAR MATRICES; FERMENTATION PROCESS; GLUCONACETOBACTER XYLINUS; NANO-CELLULOSE; PRIMARY CHONDROCYTES; THREE-DIMENSIONAL CULTURE;

BODY FLUIDS; CELLS; COLLAGEN; CYTOLOGY; FERMENTATION; GENE EXPRESSION; THREE DIMENSIONAL;

CELLULOSE;

BIOMATERIAL; CELLULOSE; COLLAGEN TYPE 1; NANOCELLULOSE; NANOMATERIAL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VERSICAN;

ARTICLE; BACTERIUM; BACTERIUM CULTURE; CARTILAGE; CARTILAGE CELL; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; EAR RECONSTRUCTION; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; FERMENTATION; GENE EXPRESSION; GLUCONACETOBACTER XYLINUS; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; NONHUMAN; NOSE CARTILAGE; NOSE SEPTUM RECONSTRUCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

AURICULAR RECONSTRUCTION; BACTERIAL NANOCELLULOSE SCAFFOLDS; HUMAN PRIMARY NASAL AND AURICULAR CHONDROCYTES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BACTERIA; CARTILAGE; EAR; HUMANS; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; MIDDLE AGED; NANOSTRUCTURES; TISSUE ENGINEERING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84886781227     PISSN: 08853282     EISSN: 15308022     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0885328212472547     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Rotter N, Bucheler M, Haisch A, et al. Cartilage tissue engineering using resorbable scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007 ; 1 (6). 411-416
2. Ciorba A, Martini A. Tissue engineering and cartilage regeneration for auricular reconstruction. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006 ; 70 (9). 1507-1515
3. Nagata S. Modification of the stages in total reconstruction of the auricle: Part IV. Ear elevation for the constructed auricle. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994 ; 93 (2). 254-266
4. Rettinger G. Autogenous and allogeneic cartilage transplants in head and neck surgery (excluding middle ear and trachea). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Suppl. 1992 ; 1: 127-162
5. Bichara DA, O'Sullivan NA, Pomerantseva I, et al. The tissue-engineered auricle: past, present, and future. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2012 ; 18 (1). 51-61
6. Ohara K, Nakamura K, Ohta E. Chest wall deformities and thoracic scoliosis after costal cartilage graft harvesting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997 ; 99 (4). 1030-1036
7. Makeen K. Total reconstruction of the auricle in lobule-type microtia. Egypt J Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 ; 27 (2). 225-230
8. Haisch A, Klaring S, Groger A, et al. A tissue-engineering model for the manufacture of auricular-shaped cartilage implants. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2002 ; 259 (6). 316-321
9. Hutmacher DW. Scaffolds in tissue engineering bone and cartilage. Biomaterials. 2000 ; 21 (24). 2529-2543
10. Haisch A. Ear reconstruction through tissue engineering. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 ; 68: 108-119
11. Lee SJ, Broda C, Atala A, et al. Engineered cartilage covered ear implants for auricular cartilage reconstruction. Biomacromolecules. 2011 ; 12 (2). 306-313
12. Bartlett W, Skinner JA, Gooding CR, et al. Autologous chondrocyte implantation versus matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation for osteochondral defects of the knee: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 ; 87 (5). 640-645
13. Lu L, Zhu X, Valenzuela RG, et al. Biodegradable polymer scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001 ;: S251 - S70
14. Rampichova M, Kostakova E, Filova E, et al. Non-woven PGA/PVA fibrous mesh as an appropriate scaffold for chondrocyte proliferation. Physiol Res. 2010 ; 59 (5). 773-781
15. Andersson J, Stenhamre H, Backdahl H, et al. Behavior of human chondrocytes in engineered porous bacterial cellulose scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010 ; 94 (4). 1124-1132
16. Freed LE, Vunjak-Novakovic G, Biron RJ, et al. Biodegradable polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biotechnology (N Y). 1994 ; 12 (7). 689-693
17. Higgins SP, Solan AK, Niklason LE. Effects of polyglycolic acid on porcine smooth muscle cell growth and differentiation. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003 ; 67 (1). 295-302
18. Neidel J, Zeidler U. Independent effects of interleukin 1 on proteoglycan synthesis and proteoglycan breakdown of bovine articular cartilage in vitro. Agents Actions. 1993 ; 39 (1-2). 82-90
19. Rotter N, Ung F, Roy AK, et al. Role for interleukin 1 alpha in the inhibition of chondrogenesis in autologous implants using polyglycolic acid-polylactic acid scaffolds. Tissue Eng. 2005 ; 11 (1-2). 192-200
20. Miyamoto T, Takahashi S, Ito H, et al. Tissue biocompatibility of cellulose and its derivatives. J Biomed Mater Res. 1989 ; 23 (1). 125-133
21. Bodin A, Gustafsson L, Gatenholm P. Surface-engineered bacterial cellulose as template for crystallization of calcium phosphate. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2006 ; 17 (4). 435-447
22. Backdahl H, Esguerra M, Delbro D, et al. Engineering microporosity in bacterial cellulose scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2008 ; 2 (6). 320-330
23. Backdahl H, Helenius G, Bodin A, et al. Mechanical properties of bacterial cellulose and interactions with smooth muscle cells. Biomaterials. 2006 ; 27 (9). 2141-2149
24. Li Z, Yan Z, Chen S, et al. Preparation for and study on the property of medical bacterial cellulose. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 2012 ; 29 (1). 164-169
25. Klemm D, Kramer F, Moritz S, et al. Nanocelluloses: a new family of nature-based materials. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2011 ; 50 (24). 5438-5466
26. Czaja W, Krystynowicz A, Bielecki S, et al. Microbial cellulose: the natural power to heal wounds. Biomaterials. 2006 ; 27 (2). 145-151
27. Liu J, Li Y, Rong X, et al. Application of crystalline cellulose membrane (Veloderm(R)) on split-thickness skin graft donor sites in burn or reconstructive plastic surgery patients. J Burn Care Res 2012, DOI:10.1097/BCR.0b013e.31825d5d8d.
28. Park SU, Lee BK, Kim MS, et al. The possibility of microbial cellulose for dressing and scaffold materials. Int Wound J 2012 DOI:10.1111/j.1742-481X. 2012.01035.x.
29. Malm CJ, Risberg B, Bodin A, et al. Small calibre biosynthetic bacterial cellulose blood vessels: 13-months patency in a sheep model. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2012 ; 46 (1). 57-62
30. Andrade FK, Costa R, Domingues L, et al. Improving bacterial cellulose for blood vessel replacement: Functionalization with a chimeric protein containing a cellulose-binding module and an adhesion peptide. Acta Biomater. 2010 ; 6 (10). 4034-4041
31. Matsuoka M, Tsuchida T, Matsushita K, et al. Synthetic medium for bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum subsp. sucrofermentation. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 1996 ; 60 (4). 575-579
32. International Organization of Standardization. ISO 10993-5.EN ISO10993. ISO 10993-5:2009 Biological evaluation of medical devices - Part 5:Tests for in vitro cytotoxicity, 2009.
33. von der Mark K, Gauss V, von der Mark H, et al. Relationship between cell shape and type of collagen synthesised as chondrocytes lose their cartilage phenotype in culture. Nature. 1977 ; 267 (5611). 531-532
34. Svensson A, Nicklasson E, Harrah T, et al. Bacterial cellulose as a potential scaffold for tissue engineering of cartilage. Biomaterials. 2005 ; 26 (4). 419-431
35. Helenius G, Backdahl H, Bodin A, et al. In vivo biocompatibility of bacterial cellulose. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006 ; 76 (2). 431-438
36. Bodin A, Backdahl H, Fink H, et al. Influence of cultivation conditions on mechanical and morphological properties of bacterial cellulose tubes. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007 ; 97 (2). 425-434
37. Backdahl H, Esguerra M, Delbro D, et al. Engineering microporosity in bacterial cellulose scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2008 ; 2 (6). 320-330
38. Nuernberger S, Cyran N, Albrecht C, et al. The influence of scaffold architecture on chondrocyte distribution and behavior in matrix-associated chondrocyte transplantation grafts. Biomaterials. 2011 ; 32 (4). 1032-1040
39. Homicz MR, Chia SH, Schumacher BL, et al. Human septal chondrocyte redifferentiation in alginate, polyglycolic acid scaffold, and monolayer culture. Laryngoscope. 2003 ; 113 (1). 25-32
40. Nehrer S, Breinan HA, Ramappa A, et al. Matrix collagen type and pore size influence behaviour of seeded canine chondrocytes. Biomaterials. 1997 ; 18 (11). 769-776
41. Stenhamre H, Nannmark U, Lindahl A, et al. Influence of pore size on the redifferentiation potential of human articular chondrocytes in poly(urethane urea) scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2011 ; 5 (7). 578-588
42. Oh SH, Park IK, Kim JM, et al. In vitro and in vivo characteristics of PCL scaffolds with pore size gradient fabricated by a centrifugation method. Biomaterials. 2007 ; 28 (9). 1664-1671
43. Emans PJ, Jansen EJ, van Iersel D, et al. Tissue-engineered constructs: the effect of scaffold architecture in osteochondral repair. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2012. DOI: 10.1002/term.1477.
44. Muller FA, Muller L, Hofmann I, et al. Cellulose-based scaffold materials for cartilage tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006 ; 27 (21). 3955-3963
45. Liu L, Wang Y, Guo S, et al. Porous polycaprolactone/nanohydroxyapatite tissue engineering scaffolds fabricated by combining NaCl and PEG as co-porogens: structure, property, and chondrocyte-scaffold interaction in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2012 ; 100 (4). 956-966
46. Freed LE, Marquis JC, Langer R, et al. Composition of cell-polymer cartilage implants. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1994 ; 43 (7). 605-614
47. Martin I, Wendt D, Heberer M. The role of bioreactors in tissue engineering. Trends Biotechnol. 2004 ; 22 (2). 80-86
48. Tay AG, Farhadi J, Suetterlin R, et al. Cell yield, proliferation, and postexpansion differentiation capacity of human ear, nasal, and rib chondrocytes. Tissue Eng. 2004 ; 10 (5-6). 762-770
49. Bodin A, Ahrenstedt L, Fink H, et al. Modification of nanocellulose with a xyloglucan-RGD conjugate enhances adhesion and proliferation of endothelial cells: implications for tissue engineering. Biomacromolecules. 2007 ; 8 (12). 3697-3704
50. Fink H, Ahrenstedt L, Bodin A, et al. Bacterial cellulose modified with xyloglucan bearing the adhesion peptide RGD promotes endothelial cell adhesion and metabolism: a promising modification for vascular grafts. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2011 ; 5 (6). 454-463
51. Stein GS, Lian JB, Owen TA. Relationship of cell growth to the regulation of tissue-specific gene expression during osteoblast differentiation. FASEB J. 1990 ; 4 (13). 3111-3123
52. Kleinman HK, Klebe RJ, Martin GR. Role of collagenous matrices in the adhesion and growth of cells. J Cell Biol. 1981 ; 88 (3). 473-485
53. Woods A, Wang G, Beier F. Regulation of chondrocyte differentiation by the actin cytoskeleton and adhesive interactions. J Cell Physiol. 2007 ; 213 (1). 1-8
54. Hotulainen P, Lappalainen P. Stress fibers are generated by two distinct actin assembly mechanisms in motile cells. J Cell Biol. 2006 ; 173 (3). 383-394
55. Schuh E, Hofmann S, Stok K, et al. Chondrocyte redifferentiation in 3D: the effect of adhesion site density and substrate elasticity. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2012 ; 100 (1). 38-47