The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A comparison of polymer and polymer-hydroxyapatite composite tissue engineered scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. An in vitro and in vivo study.

A comparison of polymer and polymer-hydroxyapatite composite tissue engineered scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. An in vitro and in vivo study.
A comparison of polymer and polymer-hydroxyapatite composite tissue engineered scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. An in vitro and in vivo study.
Previous in vitro work demonstrated porous PLA and PLGA both had the mechanical strength and sustained the excellent skeletal stem cell (SSC) growth required of an osteogenic bonegraft substitute, for use in impaction bone grafting. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effects of the addition of hydroxyapatite (HA) to the scaffolds before clinical translation. PLA, PLA+10% HA, PLGA, and PLGA+10% HA were milled and impacted into discs before undergoing a standardized shear test. Cellular compatibility analysis followed 14 days incubation with human skeletal stems cells (SSC). The best two performing polymers were taken forward for in vivo analysis. SSC seeded polymer discs were implanted subcutaneously in mice. All polymers had superior mechanical shear strength compared with allograft (p < 0.01). Excellent SSC survival was demonstrated on all polymers, but the PLA polymers showed enhanced osteoblastic activity (ALP assay p < 0.01) and collagen-1 formation. In vivo analysis was performed on PLA and PLA+10% HA. MicroCT analysis revealed increased bone formation on the PLA HA (p < 0.01), and excellent neo-vessel formation in both samples. Histology confirmed evidence of de novo bone formation. PLA HA showed both enhanced osteoinductive and osteogenic capacity. This polymer composite has been selected for scaled-up experimentation before clinical translation. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 2613-2624, 2014.
bone regeneration, scaffold, progenitor cell, skeletal stem cell, polymer
1549-3296
2613-2624
Tayton, E.
10f489e5-359c-45e4-9bf2-9b74b9d48994
Purcell, M.
2eb3601e-a537-4e44-b4c6-503c65eb801c
Aarvold, Alexander
11dc317f-47fd-4b2c-b0a6-78688c679b5a
Smith, J.O.
022d973d-c710-43a2-9f36-ae3873d62665
Briscoe, Adam
40a57aa0-be88-47a6-b528-ae8f0914d0e7
Kanczler, J.M.
eb8db9ff-a038-475f-9030-48eef2b0559c
Shakesheff, K.M.
9e3f7c5c-9191-40b6-b7b3-f454110a7950
Howdle, S.M.
9aaf52a9-58ae-4811-947a-0498f153cfa5
Dunlop, D.G.
5f8d8b5c-e516-48b8-831f-c6e5529a52cc
Oreffo, R.O.C.
ff9fff72-6855-4d0f-bfb2-311d0e8f3778
Tayton, E.
10f489e5-359c-45e4-9bf2-9b74b9d48994
Purcell, M.
2eb3601e-a537-4e44-b4c6-503c65eb801c
Aarvold, Alexander
11dc317f-47fd-4b2c-b0a6-78688c679b5a
Smith, J.O.
022d973d-c710-43a2-9f36-ae3873d62665
Briscoe, Adam
40a57aa0-be88-47a6-b528-ae8f0914d0e7
Kanczler, J.M.
eb8db9ff-a038-475f-9030-48eef2b0559c
Shakesheff, K.M.
9e3f7c5c-9191-40b6-b7b3-f454110a7950
Howdle, S.M.
9aaf52a9-58ae-4811-947a-0498f153cfa5
Dunlop, D.G.
5f8d8b5c-e516-48b8-831f-c6e5529a52cc
Oreffo, R.O.C.
ff9fff72-6855-4d0f-bfb2-311d0e8f3778

Tayton, E., Purcell, M., Aarvold, Alexander, Smith, J.O., Briscoe, Adam, Kanczler, J.M., Shakesheff, K.M., Howdle, S.M., Dunlop, D.G. and Oreffo, R.O.C. (2014) A comparison of polymer and polymer-hydroxyapatite composite tissue engineered scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. An in vitro and in vivo study. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 102 (8), 2613-2624. (doi:10.1002/jbm.a.34926). (PMID:24038868)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Previous in vitro work demonstrated porous PLA and PLGA both had the mechanical strength and sustained the excellent skeletal stem cell (SSC) growth required of an osteogenic bonegraft substitute, for use in impaction bone grafting. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effects of the addition of hydroxyapatite (HA) to the scaffolds before clinical translation. PLA, PLA+10% HA, PLGA, and PLGA+10% HA were milled and impacted into discs before undergoing a standardized shear test. Cellular compatibility analysis followed 14 days incubation with human skeletal stems cells (SSC). The best two performing polymers were taken forward for in vivo analysis. SSC seeded polymer discs were implanted subcutaneously in mice. All polymers had superior mechanical shear strength compared with allograft (p < 0.01). Excellent SSC survival was demonstrated on all polymers, but the PLA polymers showed enhanced osteoblastic activity (ALP assay p < 0.01) and collagen-1 formation. In vivo analysis was performed on PLA and PLA+10% HA. MicroCT analysis revealed increased bone formation on the PLA HA (p < 0.01), and excellent neo-vessel formation in both samples. Histology confirmed evidence of de novo bone formation. PLA HA showed both enhanced osteoinductive and osteogenic capacity. This polymer composite has been selected for scaled-up experimentation before clinical translation. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 2613-2624, 2014.

Text
A comparison of polymer and polymer-hydroxyapatite composite tissue engineered scaffolds for use in bone regeneration. An in vitro and in vivo study.pdf - Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy

More information

Published date: August 2014
Keywords: bone regeneration, scaffold, progenitor cell, skeletal stem cell, polymer
Organisations: Human Development & Health

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 367174
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/367174
ISSN: 1549-3296
PURE UUID: ecb130da-6277-4008-adb9-49acf90d7027
ORCID for J.M. Kanczler: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7249-0414
ORCID for R.O.C. Oreffo: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-5995-6726

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Jul 2014 17:39
Last modified: 05 Nov 2019 01:56

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: E. Tayton
Author: M. Purcell
Author: Alexander Aarvold
Author: J.O. Smith
Author: Adam Briscoe
Author: J.M. Kanczler ORCID iD
Author: K.M. Shakesheff
Author: S.M. Howdle
Author: D.G. Dunlop
Author: R.O.C. Oreffo ORCID iD

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×