Analysis of the Basic Characteristics of Osteogenic and Chondrogenic Cell Lines Important for Tissue Engineering Implants
- 37 Downloads
We isolated and characterized cultures of bone and cartilage tissue cells of laboratory minipigs. The size and morphological features of adherent osteogenic and chondrogenic cells were specified. During long-term culturing under standard conditions, the studied cultures expressed specific markers that were detected by immunohistochemical staining: alkaline phosphatase and calcium deposits in osteoblasts and type II collagen and cartilage extracellular matrix in chondrogenic cells. Proliferative potential (mitotic index) of both cell types was 4.64% of the total cell number. Cell motility, i.e. the mean velocity of cell motion was 49 pixels/h for osteoblasts and 47 pixels/h for chondroblasts; the mean migration distance was 2045 and 2118 pixels for chondroblasts and osteoblasts, respectively. The obtained cell lines are now used as the control for evaluation of optimal biocompatibility of scaffold materials in various models. Characteristics of the motility of the bone and cartilage tissue cells can be used for modeling and estimation of the rate of cells population of 3D scaffolds made of synthetic and biological polymers with different internal structure and physicochemical properties during designing in vitro tissue implants.
Key Wordsosteogenic and chondrogenic cells mitotic index migration rate 3D scaffold
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Deev RV, Isaev AA, Tsupkina NV, Pinaev GP, Bozo IJ, Grebnev AR, Kaligin MS. The tissue engineering bone: a methodological basis and biological properties. Geny Kletki. 2011;6(1):62-67. Russian.Google Scholar
- 2.Komlev VS, Sergeeva NS, Fedotov AYu, Sviridova IK, Kirsanova VA, Akhmedova SA, Teterina AYu, Zobov YuV, Kuvshinova EA, Shanskii YaD, Barinov SM. Analysis of physicochemical and biological properties of composite alginate-calcium phosphate matrices intended for the use in prototyping technologies for replacement of bone defects Materialovedenie. 2016;(3):38-42. Russian.Google Scholar
- 5.De Santis R, Russo A, Gloria A, D’Amora U, Russo T, Panseri S, Sandri M, Tampieri A, Marcacci M, Dediu VA, Wilde C.J, Ambrosio L. Towards the design of 3D fiber-deposited poly(ε-caprolactone)/iron-doped hydroxyapatite nanocomposite magnetic scaffolds for bone regeneration. J. Biomed. Nanotechnol. 2015;11(7):1236-1246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Di Silvio L, Gurav N. Osteoblasts. Human Cell Culture. Koller MR, Palsson BO, Masters JRW, eds. London, 2001. P. 221-241.Google Scholar
- 8.Hadjicharalambous C, Buyakov A, Buyakova S, Kulkov S, Chatzinikolaidou M. Porous alumina, zirconia and alumina/zirconia for bone repair: fabrication, mechanical and in vitro biological response. Biomed. Mater. 2015;10(2). ID 025012. doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/10/2/025012.
- 12.Khang G. Intelligent Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. Boca Raton, 2012. P. 589-606.Google Scholar
- 17.Tsekov R, Lensen M. Brownian motion and temperament of living cells. Chin. Phys. Lett. 2013;30(7):ID 070501.Google Scholar