Advertisement

Bone Regeneration Using Duck’s Feet-Derived Collagen Scaffold as an Alternative Collagen Source

  • Jeong Eun Song
  • Muthukumar Thangavelu
  • Joohee Choi
  • Hunhwi Cho
  • Byung Kwan Moon
  • Sun Jung Yoon
  • Nuno M. Neves
  • Gilson KhangEmail author
Chapter
  • 92 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 1250)

Abstract

Collagen is an important component that makes 25–35% of our body proteins. Over the past decades, tissue engineers have been designing collagen-based biocompatible materials and studying their applications in different fields. Collagen obtained from cattle and pigs has been mainly used until now, but collagen derived from fish and other livestock has attracted more attention since the outbreak of mad cow disease, and they are also used as a raw material for cosmetics and foods. Due to the zoonotic infection using collagen derived from pigs and cattle, their application in developing biomaterials is limited; hence, the development of new animal-derived collagen is required. In addition, there is a religion (Islam, Hinduism, and Judaism) limited to export raw materials and products derived from cattle and pig. Hence, high-value collagen that is universally accessible in the world market is required. Therefore, in this review, we have dealt with the use of duck’s feet-derived collagen (DC) as an emerging alternative to solve this problem and also presenting few original investigated bone regeneration results performed using DC.

Keywords

Duck’s feet Collagen Extraction Biomaterial Scaffold Bone marrow stem cell Differentiation Bone Regeneration Tissue engineering 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health &Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI15C2996) and the International Research & Development Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (NRF-2017K1A3A7A03089427).

References

  1. 1.
    Tang D, Tare RS, Yang LY et al (2016) Biofabrication of bone tissue: approaches, challenges and translation for bone regeneration. Biomaterials 83:363–382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    El-Rashidy AA, Roether JA, Harhaus L et al (2017) Regenerating bone with bioactive glass scaffolds: a review of in vivo studies in bone defect models. Acta Biomater 62:1–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oryan A, Kamali A, Moshiri A et al (2018) Chemical crosslinking of biopolymeric scaffolds: current knowledge and future directions of crosslinked engineered bone scaffolds. Int J Biol Macromol 107(Pt A):678–688PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lopes D, Martins-Cruz C, Oliveira MB et al (2018) Bone physiology as inspiration for tissue regenerative therapies. Biomaterials 185:240–275PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Almubarak S, Nethercott H, Freeberg M et al (2016) Tissue engineering strategies for promoting vascularized bone regeneration. Bone 83:197–209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tiffany AS, Gray DL, Woods TJ et al (2019) The inclusion of zinc into mineralized collagen scaffolds for craniofacial bone repair applications. Acta Biomater 93:86–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ho-Shui-Ling A, Bolander J, Rustom LE et al (2018) Bone regeneration strategies: engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives. Biomaterials 180:143–162PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    He B, Zhao JQ, Ou YS et al (2018) Biofunctionalized peptide nanofiber-based composite scaffolds for bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 90:728–738PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yoon SJ, Yoo Y, Nam SE et al (2018) The cocktail effect of BMP-2 and TGF-1 loaded in visible light-cured glycol chitosan hydrogels for the enhancement of bone formation in a rat tibial defect model. Mar Drugs 16(10)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anita LJ, Sundareswari M, Ravichandran K et al (2019) Fabrication and characterization of porous scaffolds for bone replacements using gum tragacanth. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 96:487–495Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang DH, Lee DW, Kwon YD et al (2015) Surface modification of titanium with hydroxyapatite-heparin-BMP-2 enhances the efficacy of bone formation and osseointegration in vitro and in vivo. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 9(9):1067–1077Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang D, Xiao J, Wang B et al (2019) The immune reaction and degradation fate of scaffold in cartilage/bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 104:109927PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shin YM, Shin HJ, Yang DH et al (2017) Advanced capability of radially aligned fibrous scaffolds coated with polydopamine for guiding directional migration of human mesenchymal stem cells. J Mater Chem B 5(44):8725–8737PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rubaiya Y, Kumar T, Doble M (2015) Design of biocomposite materials for bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 57:452–463Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    He XC, Fan XL, Feng WP et al (2018) Incorporation of microfibrillated cellulose into collagen-hydroxyapatite scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromole 115:385–392Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Park HK, Joo W, Gu BK et al (2018) Collagen/poly(D,L-lactic-co-glycolic acid) composite fibrous scaffold prepared by independent nozzle control multi-electrospinning apparatus for dura repair. J Ind Eng Chem 66:430–437Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhu CL, Pongkitwitoon S, Qiu JC et al (2018) Design and fabrication of a hierarchically structured scaffold for tendon-to-bone repair. Adv Mater 30(16):e1707306PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khan AF, Saleem M, Afzal A et al (2014) Bioactive behavior of silicon substituted calcium phosphate based bioceramics for bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 35:245–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li H, Nie B, Zhang S et al (2019) Immobilization of type I collagen/hyaluronic acid multilayer coating on enoxacin loaded titania nanotubes for improved osteogenesis and osseointegration in ovariectomized rats. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 175:409–420PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maghdouri-White Y, Bowlin GL et al (2014) Mammary epithelial cell adhesion, viability, and infiltration on blended or coated silk fibroin-collagen type I electrospun scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 43:37–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Magri AMP, Fernandes KR, Assis L et al (2019) Incorporation of collagen and PLGA in bioactive glass: in vivo biological evaluation. Int J Biol Macromol 134:869–881PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Babrnakova J, Pavlinakova V, Brtnikova J et al (2019) Synergistic effect of bovine platelet lysate and various polysaccharides on the biological properties of collagen-based scaffolds for tissue engineering: scaffold preparation, chemo-physical characterization, in vitro and ex ovo evaluation. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 100:236–246PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Koo Y, Choi EJ, Lee JY et al (2018) 3D printed cell-laden collagen and hybrid scaffolds for in vivo articular cartilage tissue regeneration. J Ind Eng Chem 66:343–355Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liu X, Zheng C, Luo X et al (2019) Recent advances of collagen-based biomaterials: multi-hierarchical structure, modification and biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 99:1509–1522PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bhuimbar MV, Bhagwat PK, Dandge PB (2019) Extraction and characterization of acid soluble collagen from fish waste: development of collagen-chitosan blend as food packaging film. J Environ Chem Eng 7(2):102983Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bretaud S, Nauroy P, Malbouyres M et al (2019) Fishing for collagen function: about development, regeneration and disease. Semin Cell Dev Biol 89:100–110PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sun L, Li B, Yao D et al (2018) Effects of cross-linking on mechanical, biological properties and biodegradation behavior of Nile tilapia skin collagen sponge as a biomedical material. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 80:51–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sun L, Hou H, Li B et al (2017) Characterization of acid- and pepsin-soluble collagen extracted from the skin of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Int J Biol Macromol 99:8–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mosquera M, Gimenez B, da Silva IM et al (2014) Nanoencapsulation of an active peptidic fraction from sea bream scales collagen. Food Chem 156:144–150PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bazrafshan Z, Stylios GK (2019) Spinnability of collagen as a biomimetic material: a review. Int J Biol Macromol 129:693–705PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang D, Wu X, Chen J et al (2018) The development of collagen based composite scaffolds for bone regeneration. Bioact Mater 3(1):129–138PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ferreira AM, Gentile P, Chiono V et al (2012) Collagen for bone tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater 8(9):3191–3200PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yang S, Shi XX, Li XM et al (2019) Oriented collagen fiber membranes formed through counter-rotating extrusion and their application in tendon regeneration. Biomaterials 207:61–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kim YA, Tarahovsky YS, Gaidin SG et al (2017) Flavonoids determine the rate of fibrillogenesis and structure of collagen type I fibrils in vitro. Int J Biol Macromol 104(Pt A):631–637PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    McCoy MG, Seo BR, Choi S et al (2016) Collagen I hydrogel microstructure and composition conjointly regulate vascular network formation. Acta Biomater 44:200–208PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Oliveira PN, Montembault A, Sudre G et al (2019) Self-crosslinked fibrous collagen/chitosan blends: processing, properties evaluation and monitoring of degradation by bi-fluorescence imaging. Int J Biol Macromol 131:353–367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kim SH, Park HS, Lee OJ et al (2016) Fabrication of duck’s feet collagen-silk hybrid biomaterial for tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 85:442–445PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ko H, Kim H, Ha H (2012) Extraction of collagen from livestock waste of duck’s foot and its application of scaffold materials for tissue engineering. Int J Tissue Regen 3:103–110Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kuk H, Kin HM, Kim SM et al (2015) Osteogenic effect of hybrid scaffolds composed of duck feet collagen and PLGA. Polymer Korea 39(6):846–851Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cha SR, Jeong HK, Kim SY et al (2015) Effect of duck’s feet derived collagen sponge on skin regeneration: in vitro study. Polymer Korea 39(3):493–449Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dave K, Gomes VG (2019) Interactions at scaffold interfaces: effect of surface chemistry, structural attributes and bioaffinity. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 105:110078PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bhattacharjee P, Kundu B, Naskar D et al (2017) Silk scaffolds in bone tissue engineering: an overview. Acta Biomater 63:1–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Soundarya SP, Menon AH, Chandran SV et al (2018) Bone tissue engineering: scaffold preparation using chitosan and other biomaterials with different design and fabrication techniques. Int J Biol Macromol 119:1228–1239Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Moreno MAP, Vrech SM, Sanchez MA et al (2019) Advances in additive manufacturing for bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 100:631–644Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Song JE, Tripathy N, Shin JH et al (2016) Skin regeneration using duck’s feet derived collagen and poly (vinyl alcohol) scaffold. Macromol Res 24(4):359–336Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Song JE, Jeon YS, Tian J et al (2019) Evaluation of silymarin/duck’s feet-derived collagen/hydroxyapatite sponges for bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 97:347–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kook YJ, Tian J, Jeon YS et al (2018) Nature-derived epigallocatechin gallate/duck’s feet collagen/hydroxyapatite composite sponges for enhanced bone tissue regeneration. J Biomater Sci Polym E 29(7–9):984–996Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Cha JG, Cha SR, Lee DH et al (2016) Evaluation of osteogenesis on duck’s feet derived collagen and demineralized bone particles sponges. Polymer Korea 40(6):858–864Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Song JE, Tripathy N, Shin JH et al (2017) In vivo bone regeneration evaluation of duck’s feet collagen/PLGA scaffolds in rat calvarial defect. Macromol Res 25(10):994–999Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kim SM, Kim HM, Kuk H et al (2015) Characterization and effect of inflammatory reaction of duck-feet derived collagen/poly(lactic-co-glycolide)(PLGA) hybrid scaffold. Polym Korea 39(6):837–845Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Song JE, Lee SE, Cha SR et al (2016) Inflammatory response study of gellan gum impregnated duck’s feet derived collagen sponges. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 27(15):1495–1506PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhao YL, Liu WW, Liu W et al (2018) Phorbol ester (PMA)-treated U937 cells cultured on type I collagen-coated dish express a lower production of pro-inflammatory cytokines through lowered ROS levels in parallel with cell aggregate formation. Int Immunopharmacol 55:158–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Offengenden M, Chakrabarti S, Wu J (2018) Chicken collagen hydrolysates differentially mediate anti-inflammatory activity and type I collagen synthesis on human dermal fibroblasts. Food Sci Hum Wellness 7(2):138–147Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Court M, Malier M, Millet A (2019) 3D type I collagen environment leads up to a reassessment of the classification of human macrophage polarizations. Biomaterials 208:98–109PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Preethi SS, Sanjay V, Haritha MA et al (2018) Effects of flavonoids incorporated biological macromolecules based scaffolds in bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 110:74–87Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chu C, Wang Y, Wang Y et al (2019) Evaluation of epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) modified collagen in guided bone regeneration (GBR) surgery and modulation of macrophage phenotype. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 99:73–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Song JE, Tripathy N, Lee DH et al (2018) Quercetin inlaid silk fibroin/hydroxyapatite scaffold promotes enhanced osteogenesis. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 10:32955–32964PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gupta SK, Kumar R, Mishra NC (2017) Influence of quercetin and nanohydroxyapatite modifications of decellularized goat-lung scaffold for bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 71:919–928PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Song JE, Tian J, Kook YJ et al (2019) A BMSCs-laden quercetin/duck’s feet collagen/hydroxyapatite sponge for enhanced bone regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res A 108:784–794PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ying XZ, Sun LJ, Chen XW et al (2013) Silibinin promotes osteoblast differentiation of human bone marrow stromal cells via bone morphogenetic protein signaling. Eur J Pharmacol 721(1–3):225–230PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeong Eun Song
    • 1
  • Muthukumar Thangavelu
    • 1
  • Joohee Choi
    • 1
  • Hunhwi Cho
    • 1
  • Byung Kwan Moon
    • 1
  • Sun Jung Yoon
    • 2
  • Nuno M. Neves
    • 3
  • Gilson Khang
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of BIN Convergence Technology, Department of Polymer Nano Science & Technology and Polymer BIN Research CenterJeonbuk National UniversityJeonjuSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of orthopedic surgery, Medical SchoolJeonbuk National UniversityJeonjuRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.3B’s Research Group—Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineGuimarãesPortugal

Personalised recommendations