Volume 31, Issue 2 (May 2020)                   Studies in Medical Sciences 2020, 31(2): 82-97 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology,Stem Cell Research Center, Department of Medical Nanotechnology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. (Corresponding Author) , salehiro@tbzmed.ac.ir
Abstract:   (2549 Views)
Background & Aims: Biocompatibility does not mean the absolute lack of cytotoxicity.  If the implant material performs its function in the body and keeps the interaction between the material and the cell in the body and the organ maintains its normal function, in a way that the general reaction of the body is normal, then we can say the material is biocompatible.  The aim of this study was to evaluate the histological, immunological, and biochemical effects of collagen + PCL-PEG-PCL, gelatin + PCL-PEG-PCL, and alginate + PCL-PEG-PCL in mice after 30 days of subcutaneous injection.
Materials & Methods: The scaffolds were prepared by freeze-thinning and characterized using FTIR methods. A 500 μl hydrogel scaffold was injected into the dorsal flank region of a Swiss CD1 mouse. Animals were divided into control, collagen + PCL-PEG-PCL, gelatin + PCL-PEG-PCL, and alginate + PCL-PEG-PCL groups. The mice were euthanized after 30 days to investigate the biocompatibility of the scaffold with the use of antidiabetic drugs. Skin, liver, and kidney were sampled for histopathological investigation, gene expression, and enzyme expression.
Results: In this study, a hybrid hydrogel scaffold was well-constructed and characterized. The ratio of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) to alanine aminotransferase (ALT) can distinguish liver damage from other possibilities. In the enzymatic study, the ratio of AST to ALT in the alginate + PCL-PEG-PCL group was higher than the others (2.9 times more than that of the control group). Despite the differences between the groups (blood biochemical analysis), no significant differences were observed in the enzymatic study between the groups. In the present study, in the control and collagen + PCL-PEG-PCL groups, the expression level of interleukin 10 gene was four times lower than the alginate + PCL-PEG-PCL and gelatin + PCL-PEG-PCL groups, and the findings showed significant differences (p <0.001). SOD, CAT, and CD31 genes in the PCL-PEG-PCL + alginate group showed 10.8, 3.3, and 3.5 times more expression than the beta-actin gene, respectively, and demonstrated significant differences compared to the other groups (p <0.001). In histopathological examination of external examination and macroscopic examination of organs, there was no indication of systemic complications such as shock, septicemia, toxemia, or extensive inflammatory reactions in any of the groups.
Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it can be concluded that the combination scaffold of collagen + PCL-PEG-PCL has fewer complications than other groups. The scaffold (collagen + PCL-PEG-PCL) is likely to be biocompatible and has the potential for future studies to transfer the drug, cell and growth factors and it can be used as a suitable scaffold for tissue engineering (skin and bone).
Full-Text [PDF 3569 kb]   (564 Downloads)    

1. Aamodt JM, Grainger DW. Extracellular matrix-based biomaterial scaffolds and the host response. Biomater 2016;86:68-82. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.02.003] [PMID] [PMCID]
2. Sánchez P, Pedraz J, Orive G. Biologically active and biomimetic dual gelatin scaffolds for tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 2017;98:486-94. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.12.092] [PMID]
3. Farzin A, Fathi M, Emadi R. Multifunctional magnetic nanostructured hardystonite scaffold for hyperthermia, drug delivery and tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C 2017;70:21-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.msec.2016.08.060] [PMID]
4. Islam A, Yasin T, Gull N, Khan SM, Sabir A, Munawwar MA, et al. Fabrication and performance characteristics of tough hydrogel scaffolds based on biocompatible polymers. Int J Biol Macromol 2016;92:1-10. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.07.010] [PMID]
5. Nayak KK, Gupta P. In vitro biocompatibility study of keratin/agar scaffold for tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 2015;81:1-10. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.07.025] [PMID]
6. Atala A, Mooney DJ. Synthetic biodegradable polymer scaffolds. Springer Science & Business Media; 1997. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4612-4154-6] [PMCID]
7. Cheung H-Y, Lau K-T, Lu T-P, Hui D. A critical review on polymer-based bio-engineered materials for scaffold development. Compos B Eng 2007;38(3):291-300. [DOI:10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.06.014]
8. Naahidi S, Jafari M, Logan M, Wang Y, Yuan Y, Bae H, et al. Biocompatibility of hydrogel-based scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Biotechnol Adv 2017;35(5):530-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.05.006] [PMID]
9. Gautam S, Chou C-F, Dinda AK, Potdar PD, Mishra NC. Surface modification of nanofibrous polycaprolactone/gelatin composite scaffold by collagen type I grafting for skin tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C 2014;34:402-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.msec.2013.09.043] [PMID]
10. Kim MS, Kim G. Three-dimensional electrospun polycaprolactone (PCL)/alginate hybrid composite scaffolds. Carbohydr Polym 2014;114:213-21. [DOI:10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.08.008] [PMID]
11. Yuan S, Xiong G, Wang X, Zhang S, Choong C. Surface modification of polycaprolactone substrates using collagen-conjugated poly (methacrylic acid) brushes for the regulation of cell proliferation and endothelialisation. J Mater Chem 2012; 22(26):13039-49. [DOI:10.1039/c2jm31213a]
12. Nagy NZ, Varga Z, Mihály J, Kasza G, Iván B, Kiss É. Highly efficient encapsulation of curcumin into and pH-controlled drug release from poly (e-caprolactone) nanoparticles stabilized with a novel amphiphilic hyperbranched polyglycerol. Express Polym Lett 2020;14(1): 90-101. [DOI:10.3144/expresspolymlett.2020.8]
13. Grossen P, Witzigmann D, Sieber S, Huwyler J. PEG-PCL-based nanomedicines: A biodegradable drug delivery system and its application. J Control Release 2017;260:46-60. [DOI:10.1016/j.jconrel.2017.05.028] [PMID]
14. Kang J-H, Kaneda J, Jang J-G, Sakthiabirami K, Lui E, Kim C, et al. The Influence of Electron Beam Sterilization on In Vivo Degradation of β-TCP/PCL of Different Composite Ratios for Bone Tissue Engineering. Micromachines 2020;11(3):273. [DOI:10.3390/mi11030273] [PMID] [PMCID]
15. Tran N, Le A, Ho M, Dang N, Huong TT, Truong L, et al.Polyurethane/polycaprolactone membrane grafted with conjugated linoleic acid for artificial vascular graft application. Sci Technol Adv Mater 2020;21(1):56-66. [DOI:10.1080/14686996.2020.1718549] [PMID] [PMCID]
16. de Siqueira-Santos R, Sardella-Silva G, Nascimento M, de Oliveira LT, Coelho-Sampaio T, Ribeiro-Resende V. Biological activity of laminin/polylaminin-coated poly-ℇ-caprolactone filaments on the regeneration and tissue replacement of the rat sciatic nerve. Mater Today Bio 2019;3:100026. [DOI:10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100026] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Hajiali F, Tajbakhsh S, Shojaei A. Fabrication and properties of polycaprolactone composites containing calcium phosphate-based ceramics and bioactive glasses in bone tissue engineering: a review. Polym Rev 2018;58(1):164-207. [DOI:10.1080/15583724.2017.1332640]
18. VandeVord PJ, Matthew HW, DeSilva SP, Mayton L, Wu B, Wooley PH. Evaluation of the biocompatibility of a chitosan scaffold in mice. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;59(3):585-90. [DOI:10.1002/jbm.1270] [PMID]
19. Rücker M, Laschke MW, Junker D, Carvalho C, Schramm A, Mülhaupt R, et al. Angiogenic and inflammatory response to biodegradable scaffolds in dorsal skinfold chambers of mice. Biomater 2006;27(29):5027-38. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.05.033] [PMID]
20. Ziane S, Schlaubitz S, Miraux S, Patwa A, Lalande C, Bilem I, et al. A thermosensitive low molecular weight hydrogel as scaffold for tissue engineering. Eur Cell Mater 2012;23:147-60. [DOI:10.22203/eCM.v023a11] [PMID]
21. Märtson M, Viljanto J, Hurme T, Laippala P, Saukko P. Is cellulose sponge degradable or stable as implantation material? An in vivo subcutaneous study in the rat. Biomater 1999;20(21):1989-95. [DOI:10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00094-0] [PMID]
22. Märtson M, Viljanto J, Hurme T, Saukko P. Biocompatibility of cellulose sponge with bone. Eur Surg Res 1998;30(6):426-32. [DOI:10.1159/000008609] [PMID]
23. Alhamdi JR, Peng T, Al-Naggar IM, Hawley KL, Spiller KL, Kuhn LT. Controlled M1-to-M2 transition of aged macrophages by calcium phosphate coatings. Biomater 2019;196:90-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.07.012] [PMID] [PMCID]
24. Annamalai RT, Turner PA, Carson IV WF, Levi B, Kunkel S, Stegemann JP. Harnessing macrophage-mediated degradation of gelatin microspheres for spatiotemporal control of BMP2 release. Biomater 2018;161:216-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.01.040] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Daly K, Liu S, Agrawal V, Brown B, Johnson S, Medberry C, et al. Damage associated molecular patterns within xenogeneic biologic scaffolds and their effects on host remodeling. Biomater 2012;33(1):91-101. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.09.040] [PMID]
26. Marinaro F, Sánchez-Margallo F, Álvarez V, López E, Tarazona R, Brun M, et al. Meshes in a mess: Mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies for soft tissue reinforcement. Acta Biomater 2019 ;85:60-74. [DOI:10.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.042] [PMID]
27. Pajarinen J, Lin T, Gibon E, Kohno Y, Maruyama M, Nathan K, et al. Mesenchymal stem cell-macrophage crosstalk and bone healing. Biomater 2019;196:80-9. [] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Morris AH, Stamer DK, Kunkemoeller B, Chang J, Xing H, Kyriakides TR. Decellularized materials derived from TSP2-KO mice promote enhanced neovascularization and integration in diabetic wounds. Biomater 2018;169:61-71. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.03.049] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. Bösmüller H, Pfefferle V, Bittar Z, Scheble V, Horger M, Sipos B, et al. Microvessel density and angiogenesis in primary hepatic malignancies: Differential expression of CD31 and VEGFR-2 in hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Pathol Res Pract 2018;214(8):1136-41. [DOI:10.1016/j.prp.2018.06.011] [PMID]
30. Kenar H, Ozdogan CY, Dumlu C, Doger E, Kose GT, Hasirci V. Microfibrous scaffolds from poly (l-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) blended with xeno-free collagen/hyaluronic acid for improvement of vascularization in tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C 2019;97:31-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.msec.2018.12.011] [PMID]
31. Qin J-J, Mao W, Wang X, Sun P, Cheng D, Tian S, et al. Caspase recruitment domain 6 protects against hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury by suppressing ASK1. J Hepatol 2018;69(5):1110-22. [DOI:10.1016/j.jhep.2018.06.014] [PMID]
32. Ramhøj L, Petersen MA, Boberg J, Egebjerg KM, Madsen CB, Hass U, editors. Investigation of Immunotoxicity and Thyroid Disrupting Effects after Developmental Exposure to Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) in Rats. 55th Annu Meet and ToxExpo; 2016: Society of Toxicol. [Google Scholar]
33. Fan J, Yin J-J, Ning B, Wu X, Hu Y, Ferrari M, et al. Direct evidence for catalase and peroxidase activities of ferritin-platinum nanoparticles. Biomater 2011;32(6):1611-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.11.004] [PMID]
34. Geesala R, Bar N, Dhoke NR, Basak P, Das A. Porous polymer scaffold for on-site delivery of stem cells-protects from oxidative stress and potentiates wound tissue repair. Biomater 2016;77:1-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.11.003] [PMID]
35. Mouthuy P-A, Snelling SJ, Dakin SG, Milković L, Gašparović AČ, Carr AJ, et al. Biocompatibility of implantable materials: an oxidative stress viewpoint. Biomater 2016;109:55-68. [DOI:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.09.010] [PMID]

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.