Cargando…

Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials

Porous materials are highly preferred for bone tissue engineering due to space for blood vessel ingrowth, but this may introduce extra experimental variations because of the difficulty in precise control of porosity. In order to decide whether it is absolutely necessary to use porous materials in in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Juliana T.Y., Chow, King L., Wang, Kefeng, Tsang, Wai Hung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4030915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24956447
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb2040308
_version_ 1782317442316369920
author Lee, Juliana T.Y.
Chow, King L.
Wang, Kefeng
Tsang, Wai Hung
author_facet Lee, Juliana T.Y.
Chow, King L.
Wang, Kefeng
Tsang, Wai Hung
author_sort Lee, Juliana T.Y.
collection PubMed
description Porous materials are highly preferred for bone tissue engineering due to space for blood vessel ingrowth, but this may introduce extra experimental variations because of the difficulty in precise control of porosity. In order to decide whether it is absolutely necessary to use porous materials in in vitro comparative osteogenesis study of materials with different chemistries, we carried out osteoinductivity study using C3H/10T1/2 cells, pluripotent mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), on seven material types: hydroxyapatite (HA), α-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) and β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) in both porous and dense forms and tissue culture plastic. For all materials under test, dense materials give higher alkaline phosphatase gene (Alp) expression compared with porous materials. In addition, the cell density effects on the 10T1/2 cells were assessed through alkaline phosphatase protein (ALP) enzymatic assay. The ALP expression was higher for higher initial cell plating density and this explains the greater osteoinductivity of dense materials compared with porous materials for in vitro study as porous materials would have higher surface area. On the other hand, the same trend of Alp mRNA level (HA > β-TCP > α-TCP) was observed for both porous and dense materials, validating the use of dense flat materials for comparative study of materials with different chemistries for more reliable comparison when well-defined porous materials are not available. The avoidance of porosity variation would probably facilitate more reproducible results. This study does not suggest porosity is not required for experiments related to bone regeneration application, but emphasizes that there is often a tradeoff between higher clinical relevance, and less variation in a less complex set up, which facilitates a statistically significant conclusion. Technically, we also show that the base of normalization for ALP activity may influence the conclusion and there may be ALP activity from serum, necessitating the inclusion of “no cell” control in ALP activity assay with materials. These explain the opposite conclusions drawn by different groups on the effect of porosity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4030915
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40309152014-06-12 Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials Lee, Juliana T.Y. Chow, King L. Wang, Kefeng Tsang, Wai Hung J Funct Biomater Communication Porous materials are highly preferred for bone tissue engineering due to space for blood vessel ingrowth, but this may introduce extra experimental variations because of the difficulty in precise control of porosity. In order to decide whether it is absolutely necessary to use porous materials in in vitro comparative osteogenesis study of materials with different chemistries, we carried out osteoinductivity study using C3H/10T1/2 cells, pluripotent mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), on seven material types: hydroxyapatite (HA), α-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) and β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) in both porous and dense forms and tissue culture plastic. For all materials under test, dense materials give higher alkaline phosphatase gene (Alp) expression compared with porous materials. In addition, the cell density effects on the 10T1/2 cells were assessed through alkaline phosphatase protein (ALP) enzymatic assay. The ALP expression was higher for higher initial cell plating density and this explains the greater osteoinductivity of dense materials compared with porous materials for in vitro study as porous materials would have higher surface area. On the other hand, the same trend of Alp mRNA level (HA > β-TCP > α-TCP) was observed for both porous and dense materials, validating the use of dense flat materials for comparative study of materials with different chemistries for more reliable comparison when well-defined porous materials are not available. The avoidance of porosity variation would probably facilitate more reproducible results. This study does not suggest porosity is not required for experiments related to bone regeneration application, but emphasizes that there is often a tradeoff between higher clinical relevance, and less variation in a less complex set up, which facilitates a statistically significant conclusion. Technically, we also show that the base of normalization for ALP activity may influence the conclusion and there may be ALP activity from serum, necessitating the inclusion of “no cell” control in ALP activity assay with materials. These explain the opposite conclusions drawn by different groups on the effect of porosity. MDPI 2011-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4030915/ /pubmed/24956447 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb2040308 Text en © 2011 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Communication
Lee, Juliana T.Y.
Chow, King L.
Wang, Kefeng
Tsang, Wai Hung
Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title_full Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title_fullStr Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title_full_unstemmed Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title_short Is Macroporosity Absolutely Required for Preliminary in Vitro Bone Biomaterial Study? A Comparison between Porous Materials and Flat Materials
title_sort is macroporosity absolutely required for preliminary in vitro bone biomaterial study? a comparison between porous materials and flat materials
topic Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4030915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24956447
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb2040308
work_keys_str_mv AT leejulianaty ismacroporosityabsolutelyrequiredforpreliminaryinvitrobonebiomaterialstudyacomparisonbetweenporousmaterialsandflatmaterials
AT chowkingl ismacroporosityabsolutelyrequiredforpreliminaryinvitrobonebiomaterialstudyacomparisonbetweenporousmaterialsandflatmaterials
AT wangkefeng ismacroporosityabsolutelyrequiredforpreliminaryinvitrobonebiomaterialstudyacomparisonbetweenporousmaterialsandflatmaterials
AT tsangwaihung ismacroporosityabsolutelyrequiredforpreliminaryinvitrobonebiomaterialstudyacomparisonbetweenporousmaterialsandflatmaterials