Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:45:34.273Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving cellular migration in tissue-engineered laryngeal scaffolds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2019

K Wismayer ,
N Mehrban ,
J Bowen  and
M Birchall
K Wismayer*
Affiliation:
Division of Surgery, Ear Institute, University College London, UK
N Mehrban
Affiliation:
Division of Surgery, Ear Institute, University College London, UK
J Bowen
Affiliation:
School of Engineering and Innovation, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
M Birchall
Affiliation:
Ear Institute, University College London, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Kurt Wismayer, Doctor's Office, 10 South Ward, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, London W6 8RF, UK E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To modify the non-porous surface membrane of a tissue-engineered laryngeal scaffold to allow effective cell entry.

Methods

The mechanical properties, surface topography and chemistry of polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane poly(carbonate-urea) urethane were characterised. A laser technique introduced surface perforations. Micro computed tomography generated porosity data. Scaffolds were seeded with cells, investigated histologically and proliferation studied. Incubation and time effects were assessed.

Results

Laser cutting perforated the polymer, connecting the substructure with the ex-scaffold environment and increasing porosity (porous, non-perforated = 87.9 per cent; porous, laser-perforated at intensities 3 = 96.4 per cent and 6 = 89.5 per cent). Cellular studies confirmed improved cell viability. Histology showed cells adherent to the scaffold surface and cells within perforations, and indicated that cells migrated into the scaffolds. After 15 days of incubation, scanning electron microscopy revealed an 11 per cent reduction in pore diameter, correlating with a decrease in Young's modulus.

Conclusion

Introducing surface perforations presents a viable method of improving polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane poly(carbonate-urea) urethane as a tissue-engineered scaffold.

Keywords

Tissue EngineeringLaryngeal NeoplasmsPorosityCell ProliferationNanocompositesTissue Scaffolds
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 133 , Issue 2 , February 2019 , pp. 135 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr K Wismayer takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

Presented at the Association of Surgeons in Training conference, 31 March – 2 April 2017, Bournemouth, UK.

References

1Ansari, T, Lange, P, Southgate, A, Greco, K, Carvalho, C, Partington, L et al. Stem cell-based tissue-engineered laryngeal replacement. Stem Cells Transl Med 2017;6:677–87Google Scholar
2Ganly, I, Patel, S, Matsuo, J, Singh, B, Kraus, D, Boyle, J et al. Postoperative complications of salvage total laryngectomy. Cancer 2005;103:2073–81Google Scholar
3Ganly, I, Patel, SG, Matsuo, J, Singh, B, Kraus, DH, Boyle, J et al. Analysis of postoperative complications of open partial laryngectomy. Head Neck 2009;31:338–45Google Scholar
4Pereira da Silva, A, Feliciano, T, Vaz Freitas, S, Esteves, S, Almeida e Sousa, C. Quality of life in patients submitted to total laryngectomy. J Voice 2015;29:382–8Google Scholar
5Agarwal, SK, Gogia, S, Agarwal, A, Agarwal, R, Mathur, AS. Assessment of voice related quality of life and its correlation with socioeconomic status after total laryngectomy. Ann Palliat Med 2015;4:169–75Google Scholar
6Omori, K, Nakamura, T, Kanemaru, S, Asato, R, Yamashita, M, Tanaka, S et al. Regenerative medicine of the trachea: the first human case. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2005;114:429–33Google Scholar
7Laurance, J. British boy receives trachea transplant built with his own stem cells. BMJ 2010;340:c1633Google Scholar
8Hamilton, NJ, Kanani, M, Roebuck, DJ, Hewitt, RJ, Cetto, R, Culme-Seymour, EJ et al. Tissue-engineered tracheal replacement in a child: a 4-year follow-up study. Am J Transplant 2015;15:2750–7Google Scholar
9Hamilton, NJI, Birchall, MA. Tissue-engineered larynx: future applications in laryngeal cancer. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep 2017;5:42–8Google Scholar
10Mehrban, N, Zhu, B, Tamagnini, F, Young, FI, Wasmuth, A, Hudson, KL et al. Functionalized α-helical peptide hydrogels for neural tissue engineering. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2015;1:431–9Google Scholar
11Atala, A, Kasper, FK, Mikos, AG. Engineering complex tissues. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:160rv12Google Scholar
12Cunha, C, Panseri, S, Antonini, S. Emerging nanotechnology approaches in tissue engineering for peripheral nerve regeneration. Nanomedicine 2011;7:50–9Google Scholar
13Hollister, SJ. Porous scaffold design for tissue engineering. Nat Mater 2005;4:518–24Google Scholar
14Knight, PT, Lee, KM, Chung, T, Mather, PT. PLGA−POSS end-linked networks with tailored degradation and shape memory behavior. Macromolecules 2009;42:6596–605Google Scholar
15Gupta, A, Vara, DS, Punshon, G, Sales, KM, Winslet, MC, Seifalian, AM. In vitro small intestinal epithelial cell growth on a nanocomposite polycaprolactone scaffold. Biotechnol Appl Biochem 2009;54:221–9Google Scholar
16Tan, A, Farhatnia, Y, Seifalian, AM. Polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane poly(carbonate-urea) urethane (POSS-PCU): applications in nanotechnology and regenerative medicine. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 2013;41:495–513Google Scholar
17Anderson, J, Zhao, Q. Biostability of biomedical polymers. MRS Bulletin 1991;16:75–7Google Scholar
18Loh, QL, Choong, C. Three-dimensional scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: role of porosity and pore size. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2013;19:485–502Google Scholar
19Hamilton, N, Bullock, AJ, Macneil, S, Janes, SM, Birchall, M. Tissue engineering airway mucosa: a systematic review. Laryngoscope 2014;124:961–8Google Scholar
20Chawla, R, Tan, A, Ahmed, M, Crowley, C, Moiemen, NS, Cui, Z et al. A polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane-based bilayered dermal scaffold seeded with adipose tissue-derived stem cells: in vitro assessment of biomechanical properties. J Surg Res 2014;188:361–72Google Scholar
21Nayyer, L, Jell, G, Esmaeili, A, Birchall, M, Seifalian, AM. A biodesigned nanocomposite biomaterial for auricular cartilage reconstruction. Adv Healthc Mater 2016;5:1203–12Google Scholar
22Davis, JR. Tensile Testing. Russell Township: ASM International, 2004Google Scholar
23Schindelin, J, Rueden, CT, Hiner, MC, Eliceiri, KW. The ImageJ ecosystem: an open platform for biomedical image analysis. Mol Reprod Dev 2015;82:518–29Google Scholar
24Butler, CR, Hynds, RE, Gowers, KHC, Lee, DDH, Brown, JM, Crowley, C et al. Rapid expansion of human epithelial stem cells suitable for airway tissue engineering. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2016;194:156–68Google Scholar
25Divieto, C, Sassi, MP. A first approach to evaluate the cell dose in highly porous scaffolds by using a nondestructive metabolic method. Future Sci OA 2015;1:FSO58Google Scholar
26Nayyer, L, Birchall, M, Seifalian, AM, Jell, G. Design and development of nanocomposite scaffolds for auricular reconstruction. Nanomedicine 2014;10:235–46Google Scholar
27Horst, M, Madduri, S, Milleret, V, Sulser, T, Gobet, R, Eberli, D. A bilayered hybrid microfibrous PLGA--acellular matrix scaffold for hollow organ tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2013;34:1537–45Google Scholar
28Crowley, C, Klanrit, P, Butler, CR, Varanou, A, Plate, M, Hynds, RE et al. Surface modification of a POSS-nanocomposite material to enhance cellular integration of a synthetic bioscaffold. Biomaterials 2016;83:283–93Google Scholar
29Murphy, CM, O'Brien, FJ. Understanding the effect of mean pore size on cell activity in collagen-glycosaminoglycan scaffolds. Cell Adh Migr 2010;4:377–81Google Scholar
30de Mel, A, Punshon, G, Ramesh, B, Sarkar, S, Darbyshire, A, Hamilton, G et al. In situ endothelialization potential of a biofunctionalised nanocomposite biomaterial-based small diameter bypass graft. Biomed Mater Eng 2009;19:317–31Google Scholar
31Freyman, TM, Yannas, IV, Gibson, LJ. Cellular materials as porous scaffolds for tissue engineering. Prog Mater Sci 2001;46:273–82Google Scholar
32Liebschner, MAK. Computer-Aided Tissue Engineering. New York: Humana Press, 2012Google Scholar
33Hendow, EK, Guhmann, P, Wright, B, Sofokleous, P, Parmar, N, Day, RM. Biomaterials for hollow organ tissue engineering. Fibrogenesis Tissue Repair 2016;9:3Google Scholar
34Murphy, CM, Haugh, MG, O'Brien, FJ. The effect of mean pore size on cell attachment, proliferation and migration in collagen-glycosaminoglycan scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2009;31:461–6Google Scholar
35Grayson, WL, Bhumiratana, S, Cannizzaro, C, Chao, PH, Lennon, DP, Caplan, AI et al. Effects of initial seeding density and fluid perfusion rate on formation of tissue-engineered bone. Tissue Eng Part A 2008;14:1809–20Google Scholar
36O'Brien, J, Wilson, I, Orton, T, Pognan, F. Investigation of the Alamar Blue (resazurin) fluorescent dye for the assessment of mammalian cell cytotoxicity. Eur J Biochem 2000;267:5421–6Google Scholar
37Guo, S, DiPietro, LA. Factors affecting wound healing. J Dent Res 2010;89:219–29Google Scholar
38Pastar, I, Stojadinovic, O, Yin, NC, Ramirez, H, Nusbaum, AG, Sawaya, A et al. Epithelialization in wound healing: a comprehensive review. Adv Wound Care 2014;3:445–64Google Scholar
39Coraux, C, Nawrocki-Raby, B, Hinnrasky, J, Kileztky, C, Gaillard, D, Dani, C et al. Embryonic stem cells generate airway epithelial tissue. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2005;32:87–92Google Scholar
40Vrana, NE, Lavalle, P, Dokmeci, MR, Dehghani, F, Ghaemmaghami, AM, Khademhosseini, A. Engineering functional epithelium for regenerative medicine and in vitro organ models: a review. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2013;19:529–43Google Scholar
41Lutolf, MP, Hubbell, JA. Synthetic biomaterials as instructive extracellular microenvironments for morphogenesis in tissue engineering. Nat Biotechnol 2005;23:47–55Google Scholar
42Anzlovar, A, Kogej, K, Orel, ZC, Zigon, M. Polyol mediated nano size zinc oxide and nanocomposites with poly(methyl methacrylate). Express Polymer Letters 2011;5:604–19Google Scholar
43Ma, Z, Kotaki, M, Inai, R, Ramakrishna, S. Potential of nanofiber matrix as tissue-engineering scaffolds. Tissue Eng 2005;11:101–9Google Scholar
44Karageorgiou, V, Kaplan, D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 2005;26:5474–91Google Scholar
45Chen, Q, Bretcanu, O, Boccaccini, AR. Inorganic and Composite Bioactive Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering. In: Chu, PK, Liu, X, eds. Biomaterials Fabrication and Processing Handbook, 1st edn. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2008;1:12Google Scholar
46Engler, AJ, Sen, S, Sweeney, HL, Discher, DE. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 2006;126:677–89Google Scholar
47Baiguera, S, Gonfiotti, A, Jaus, M, Comin, CE, Paglierani, M, Del Gaudio, C et al. Development of bioengineered human larynx. Biomaterials 2011;32:4433–42Google Scholar
48Asawa, Y, Sakamoto, T, Komura, M, Watanabe, M, Nishizawa, S, Takazawa, Y et al. Early stage foreign body reaction against biodegradable polymer scaffolds affects tissue regeneration during the autologous transplantation of tissue-engineered cartilage in the canine model. Cell Transplant 2012;21:1431–42Google Scholar
49Maughan, EF, Butler, CR, Crowley, C, Teoh, GZ, Hondt, MD, Hamilton, NJ et al. A comparison of tracheal scaffold strategies for pediatric transplantation in a rabbit model. Laryngoscope 2017;127:E449–57Google Scholar