Cargando…

Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats

BACKGROUND: The selection of appropriate scaffold plays an important role in ensuring the success of bone regeneration. The use of scaffolds with different materials and their effect on the osteogenic performance of cells is not well studied and this can affect the selection of suitable scaffolds fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luchman, Nur Atmaliya, Megat Abdul Wahab, Rohaya, Zainal Ariffin, Shahrul Hisham, Nasruddin, Nurrul Shaqinah, Lau, Seng Fong, Yazid, Farinawati
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9070322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35529494
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13356
_version_ 1784700615148961792
author Luchman, Nur Atmaliya
Megat Abdul Wahab, Rohaya
Zainal Ariffin, Shahrul Hisham
Nasruddin, Nurrul Shaqinah
Lau, Seng Fong
Yazid, Farinawati
author_facet Luchman, Nur Atmaliya
Megat Abdul Wahab, Rohaya
Zainal Ariffin, Shahrul Hisham
Nasruddin, Nurrul Shaqinah
Lau, Seng Fong
Yazid, Farinawati
author_sort Luchman, Nur Atmaliya
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The selection of appropriate scaffold plays an important role in ensuring the success of bone regeneration. The use of scaffolds with different materials and their effect on the osteogenic performance of cells is not well studied and this can affect the selection of suitable scaffolds for transplantation. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the comparative ability of two different synthetic scaffolds, mainly hydroxyapatite (HA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds in promoting in vitro and in vivo bone regeneration. METHOD: In vitro cell viability, morphology, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity of MC3T3-E1 cells on HA and PCL scaffolds were determined in comparison to the accepted model outlined for two-dimensional systems. An in vivo study involving the transplantation of MC3T3-E1 cells with scaffolds into an artificial bone defect of 4 mm length and 1.5 mm depth in the rat’s left maxilla was conducted. Three-dimensional analysis using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), and immunohistochemistry analyses evaluation were performed after six weeks of transplantation. RESULTS: MC3T3-E1 cells on the HA scaffold showed the highest cell viability. The cell viability on both scaffolds decreased after 14 days of culture, which reflects the dominant occurrence of osteoblast differentiation. An early sign of osteoblast differentiation can be detected on the PCL scaffold. However, cells on the HA scaffold showed more prominent results with intense mineralized nodules and significantly (p < 0.05) high levels of ALP activity with prolonged osteoblast induction. Micro-CT and H&E analyses confirmed the in vitro results with bone formation were significantly (p < 0.05) greater in HA scaffold and was supported by IHC analysis which confirmed stronger expression of osteogenic markers ALP and osteocalcin. CONCLUSION: Different scaffold materials of HA and PCL might have influenced the bone regeneration ability of MC3T3-E1. Regardless, in vitro and in vivo bone regeneration was better in the HA scaffold which indicates its great potential for application in bone regeneration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9070322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90703222022-05-05 Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats Luchman, Nur Atmaliya Megat Abdul Wahab, Rohaya Zainal Ariffin, Shahrul Hisham Nasruddin, Nurrul Shaqinah Lau, Seng Fong Yazid, Farinawati PeerJ Biochemistry BACKGROUND: The selection of appropriate scaffold plays an important role in ensuring the success of bone regeneration. The use of scaffolds with different materials and their effect on the osteogenic performance of cells is not well studied and this can affect the selection of suitable scaffolds for transplantation. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the comparative ability of two different synthetic scaffolds, mainly hydroxyapatite (HA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds in promoting in vitro and in vivo bone regeneration. METHOD: In vitro cell viability, morphology, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity of MC3T3-E1 cells on HA and PCL scaffolds were determined in comparison to the accepted model outlined for two-dimensional systems. An in vivo study involving the transplantation of MC3T3-E1 cells with scaffolds into an artificial bone defect of 4 mm length and 1.5 mm depth in the rat’s left maxilla was conducted. Three-dimensional analysis using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), and immunohistochemistry analyses evaluation were performed after six weeks of transplantation. RESULTS: MC3T3-E1 cells on the HA scaffold showed the highest cell viability. The cell viability on both scaffolds decreased after 14 days of culture, which reflects the dominant occurrence of osteoblast differentiation. An early sign of osteoblast differentiation can be detected on the PCL scaffold. However, cells on the HA scaffold showed more prominent results with intense mineralized nodules and significantly (p < 0.05) high levels of ALP activity with prolonged osteoblast induction. Micro-CT and H&E analyses confirmed the in vitro results with bone formation were significantly (p < 0.05) greater in HA scaffold and was supported by IHC analysis which confirmed stronger expression of osteogenic markers ALP and osteocalcin. CONCLUSION: Different scaffold materials of HA and PCL might have influenced the bone regeneration ability of MC3T3-E1. Regardless, in vitro and in vivo bone regeneration was better in the HA scaffold which indicates its great potential for application in bone regeneration. PeerJ Inc. 2022-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9070322/ /pubmed/35529494 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13356 Text en ©2022 Luchman et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Biochemistry
Luchman, Nur Atmaliya
Megat Abdul Wahab, Rohaya
Zainal Ariffin, Shahrul Hisham
Nasruddin, Nurrul Shaqinah
Lau, Seng Fong
Yazid, Farinawati
Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title_full Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title_fullStr Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title_short Comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
title_sort comparison between hydroxyapatite and polycaprolactone in inducing osteogenic differentiation and augmenting maxillary bone regeneration in rats
topic Biochemistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9070322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35529494
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13356
work_keys_str_mv AT luchmannuratmaliya comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats
AT megatabdulwahabrohaya comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats
AT zainalariffinshahrulhisham comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats
AT nasruddinnurrulshaqinah comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats
AT lausengfong comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats
AT yazidfarinawati comparisonbetweenhydroxyapatiteandpolycaprolactoneininducingosteogenicdifferentiationandaugmentingmaxillaryboneregenerationinrats