Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g7rbq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T09:58:53.084Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Porous Polymer-Ceramic Systems for Tissue Engineering Support the Formation of Mineralized Bone Matrix

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

C. T. Laurencin ,
M. A. Attawia ,
H. M. Elgendy  and
M. Fan
C. T. Laurencin
Affiliation:
The Helen I. Moorehead-Laurencin Biomaterials Research Laboratory, Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Medical College of Pennsylvania and Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA Department of Chemical Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA
M. A. Attawia
Affiliation:
The Helen I. Moorehead-Laurencin Biomaterials Research Laboratory, Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Medical College of Pennsylvania and Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA
H. M. Elgendy
Affiliation:
The Helen I. Moorehead-Laurencin Biomaterials Research Laboratory, Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
M. Fan
Affiliation:
The Helen I. Moorehead-Laurencin Biomaterials Research Laboratory, Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
Get access

Abstract

Osteoblast cell differentiation and bone formation using rat calvaria cells were studied on the surface of a porous 3-dimensional polymer matrix of 50:50 poly (lactide-co-glycolide) (PLAGA)/ hydroxyapatite (HA). Cell proliferation was determined at 24 hr, 3, 7, 14, and 21 days. Exponential growth was observed during the first week and a steady increase in the population continued until 21 days after cells were seeded. Cell growth kinetics on PLAGA/HA showed an exponential pattern. Environmental scanning electron microscopy revealed the formation of multilayers of cells growing throughout the polymer matrices by day 7 and through day 21. Alkaline phosphatase (AP) activity was demonstrated after 21 days of culture on PLAGA/HA using a commercial diagnostic kit. Light microscopy observations of experiment cultures revealed active osteoblastic cells forming a characteristic mineralized matrix in the presence of β-glycerophosphate as a phosphate donor. Mineralization was not seen when the matrix alone was incubated with the reagent, indicating that the mineralization was due to the cells and not the HA in the matrix. These results suggested that the 3-dimensional PLAGA/HA matrix studied provided an excellent matrix for bone cell differentiation and mineralization in vitro and therefore may be a good candidate as a synthetic implant for bone regeneration.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 414: Symposium Z – Thin Films and Surfaces for Bioactivity and Biomedical Applications , 1995 , 157
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

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.)

References

1. Parrish, F.F., Clin. Orthop. 87, p. 36–42 (1972).Google Scholar
2. Mankin, H.J., Gebhart, M.C., and Tomford, W.W., Orthop. Clin. North. Am. 18, p. 275–289 (1987).Google Scholar
3. Coombes, A.G. and Heckman, J.D., Biomaterials 13, p. 217–224 (1992).Google Scholar
4. Hollinger, J.O., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 17, p. 71–82 (1983).Google Scholar
5. Hollinger, J.O. and Battistone, G.C., Clin.Orthop. 207, p. 290–305 (1986).Google Scholar
6. Jarcho, M., Clin. Orthop. 157, p. 259–278 (1981).Google Scholar
7. Devin, J., Attawia, M.A. and Laurencin, C.T., J. Biomed. Sci. Poly. Ed. (in press)Google Scholar
8. Attawia, M.A., Devin, J. and Laurencin, C.T., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 29, p. 843–848 (1995).Google Scholar
9. Attawia, M.A., Herbert, K.M. and Laurencin, C.T., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 213, p. 639–644 (1995).Google Scholar
10. Kumegawa, M., Hiramatsu, M., Hatakeyama, K., Yajima, T., Kodama, H., Osaki, T. and Kurisu, K., Calcif. Tissue Int. 35, p. 542–548 (1983).Google Scholar
11. Hauschka, P.V., Lian, J.B., Cole, D.E. and Gundberg, C.M., Physio. Rev. 69(3), p. 990–1047 (1989).Google Scholar
12. Hauschka, P.V. and Wians, F.H., Anat. Rec. 224, p. 180–188 (1989).Google Scholar
13. Desbois, C., Hagihara, K., Pinero, G., Boyce, B., Bonadio, J., Tseng, K.F., Goulet, R., Goldstein, S., Loyer, E., Bradley, A. and Karsenty, G., J. Bone Min. Res. 10 (supp 1), p. S139 (1995).Google Scholar
14. Boskey, A.L., Clin. Orthop. 157, p. 225–257 (1981).Google Scholar
15. Freshney, I. (ed.), Culture of Animal Cells. Liss Inc., New York, 1987, p. 272–276.Google Scholar
16. Krajian, A.A. (ed.), Histopathologic Technic. Mosby, C.V., St. Louis, 1940, 183–184.Google Scholar
17. Bellows, C.G., Aubin, J.E., Heersche, J.N.M. and Antosz, , Calcif. Tissue Int. 38, p. 143–154 (1986).Google Scholar
18. Nefussi, J.R., Boy-Lefevre, M.L., Boulekbache, H. and Forest, N., Differentiation 29, p. 160–168 (1985).Google Scholar
19. Puleo, D.A., Holleran, L.A., Doremus, R.H. and Bizios, R., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 25, p. 711–723 (1991).Google Scholar
20. Hall, B. (ed), Bone, vol.8, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, 1994, p. 1–46.Google Scholar
21. Eggli, P.S., Muller, W. and Scenk, R.K., Clin. Orthop. 232, p. 127–138 (1987).Google Scholar
22. Allcock, H.R., Fuller, T.J., Mack, D.P., Matsumura, K. and Smeltz, K.M., Macromolecules 10, p. 824–830 (1977).Google Scholar