Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validation of the optimal scaffold pore size of nasal implants using the 3-dimensional culture technique

  • Nam, Jeoung Hyun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital) ;
  • Lee, So Yun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital) ;
  • Khan, Galina (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital) ;
  • Park, Eun Soo (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital)
  • Received : 2020.02.14
  • Accepted : 2020.05.19
  • Published : 2020.07.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background To produce patient-specific nasal implants, it is necessary to harvest and grow autologous cartilage. It is crucial to the proliferation and growth of these cells for scaffolds similar to the extracellular matrix to be prepared. The pore size of the scaffold is critical to cell growth and interaction. Thus, the goal of this study was to determine the optimal pore size for the growth of chondrocytes and fibroblasts. Methods Porous disc-shaped scaffolds with 100-, 200-, 300-, and 400-㎛ pores were produced using polycaprolactone (PCL). Chondrocytes and fibroblasts were cultured after seeding the scaffolds with these cells, and morphologic evaluation was performed on days 2, 14, 28, and 56 after cell seeding. On each of those days, the number of viable cells was evaluated quantitatively using an MTT assay. Results The number of cells had moderately increased by day 28. This increase was noteworthy for the 300- and 400-㎛ pore sizes for fibroblasts; otherwise, no remarkable difference was observed at any size except the 100-㎛ pore size for chondrocytes. By day 56, the number of cells was observed to increase with pore size, and the number of chondrocytes had markedly increased at the 400-㎛ pore size. The findings of the morphologic evaluation were consistent with those of the quantitative evaluation. Conclusions Experiments using disc-type PCL scaffolds showed (via both morphologic and quantitative analysis) that chondrocytes and fibroblasts proliferated most extensively at the 400-㎛ pore size in 56 days of culture.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn JM. The current trend in augmentation rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2006;22:61-9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-939954
  2. Godin MS, Waldman SR, Johnson CM Jr. Nasal augmentation using Gore-Tex: a 10-year experience. Arch Facial Plast Surg 1999;1:118-21. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.1.2.118
  3. Kim YS, Shin YS, Park DY, et al. The application of three-dimensional printing in animal model of augmentation rhinoplasty. Ann Biomed Eng 2015;43:2153-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-015-1261-3
  4. Xu Y, Fan F, Kang N, et al. Tissue engineering of human nasal alar cartilage precisely by using three-dimensional printing. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:451-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000856
  5. Yi HG, Choi YJ, Jung JW, et al. Three-dimensional printing of a patient-specific engineered nasal cartilage for augmentative rhinoplasty. J Tissue Eng 2019 Jan 16 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041731418824797.
  6. Baker SC, Rohman G, Southgate J, et al. The relationship between the mechanical properties and cell behaviour on PLGA and PCL scaffolds for bladder tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2009;30:1321-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.11.033
  7. Li WJ, Danielson KG, Alexander PG, et al. Biological response of chondrocytes cultured in three-dimensional nanofibrous poly($\epsilon$-caprolactone) scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res Part 2003;67A:1105-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.10101
  8. Pina S, Ferreira JMF. Bioresorbable plates and screws for clinical applications: a review. J Healthc Eng 2012;3:243-60. https://doi.org/10.1260/2040-2295.3.2.243
  9. 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;28:1664-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.11.024
  10. Park BK. Biodegradable polymers for tissue engineering: review article. J Biomed Eng Res 2015;36:251-63. https://doi.org/10.9718/JBER.2015.36.6.251
  11. Nava MM, Draghi L, Giordano C, et al. The effect of scaffold pore size in cartilage tissue engineering. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2016;14:e223-9.
  12. Oh SH, Kang SG, Kim ES, et al. Fabrication and characterization of hydrophilic poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid)/poly(vinyl alcohol) blend cell scaffolds by melt-molding particulate-leaching method. Biomaterials 2003;24:4011-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00284-9
  13. Knight E, Przyborski S. Advances in 3D cell culture technologies enabling tissue-like structures to be created in vitro. J Anat 2015;227:746-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.12257
  14. Loh QL, Choong C. Three-dimensional scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: role of porosity and pore size. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2013;19:485-502. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0437
  15. Pina S, Ribeiro VP, Marques CF, et al. Scaffolding strategies for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications. Materials (Basel) 2019;12:1824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12111824
  16. Wang X, Chang J, Wu C. Bioactive inorganic/organic nanocomposites for wound healing. Appl Mater Today 2018;11: 308-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2018.03.001
  17. Park YJ, Cha JH, Bang SI, et al. Clinical application of three-dimensionally printed biomaterial polycaprolactone (PCL) in augmentation rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2019;43: 437-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1280-1
  18. Yamane S, Iwasaki N, Kasahara Y, et al. Effect of pore size on in vitro cartilage formation using chitosan-based hyaluronic acid hybrid polymer fibers. J Biomed Mater Res A 2007;81: 586-93.
  19. Im GI, Ko JY, Lee JH. Chondrogenesis of adipose stem cells in a porous polymer scaffold: influence of the pore size. Cell Transplant 2012;21:2397-405. https://doi.org/10.3727/096368912X638865
  20. Perez RA, Mestres G. Role of pore size and morphology in musculo-skeletal tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 2016;61:922-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2015.12.087
  21. Salem AK, Stevens R, Pearson RG, et al. Interactions of 3T3 fibroblasts and endothelial cells with defined pore features. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;61:212-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.10195
  22. Whang K, Healy KE, Elenz DR, et al. Engineering bone regeneration with bioabsorbable scaffolds with novel microarchitecture. Tissue Eng 1999;5:35-51. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.1999.5.35
  23. Griffon DJ, Sedighi MR, Schaeffer DV, et al. Chitosan scaffolds: interconnective pore size and cartilage engineering. Acta Biomater 2006 May;2:313-20.
  24. 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;5:578-88. https://doi.org/10.1002/term.350
  25. Li Y, Meng H, Liu Y, et al. Fibrin gel as an injectable biodegradable scaffold and cell carrier for tissue engineering. ScientificWorldJournal 2015;2015:685690