Cargando…
In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds
BACKGROUND: A rigorous search for alternatives to autogenous bone grafts to avoid invasiveness at the donor site in the treatment of maxillomandibular bone defects. Researchers have used alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone graft substitutes in clinical studies with varying degrees of succes...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890824/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02726-4 |
_version_ | 1784881018283491328 |
---|---|
author | Heitzer, Marius Modabber, Ali Zhang, Xing Winnand, Philipp Zhao, Qun Bläsius, Felix Marius Buhl, Eva Miriam Wolf, Michael Neuss, Sabine Hölzle, Frank Hildebrand, Frank Greven, Johannes |
author_facet | Heitzer, Marius Modabber, Ali Zhang, Xing Winnand, Philipp Zhao, Qun Bläsius, Felix Marius Buhl, Eva Miriam Wolf, Michael Neuss, Sabine Hölzle, Frank Hildebrand, Frank Greven, Johannes |
author_sort | Heitzer, Marius |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A rigorous search for alternatives to autogenous bone grafts to avoid invasiveness at the donor site in the treatment of maxillomandibular bone defects. Researchers have used alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone graft substitutes in clinical studies with varying degrees of success, although their in vitro effects on stem cells remain unclear. Dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) can potentially enhance the bone regeneration of bone graft substitutes. The present in vitro study investigates the osteogenic capability of DPSCs on alloplastic (biphasic calcium phosphate [BCP]), allogeneic (freeze-dried bone allografts [FDBAs]), and xenogeneic (deproteinized bovine bone mineral [DBBM]) bone grafts. METHODS: Human DPSCs were seeded on 0.5 mg/ml, 1 mg/ml, and 2 mg/ml of BCP, FDBA, and DBBM to evaluate the optimal cell growth and cytotoxicity. Scaffolds and cell morphologies were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Calcein AM and cytoskeleton staining were performed to determine cell attachment and proliferation. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and osteogenesis-related genes expressions was used to investigate initial osteogenic differentiation. RESULTS: Cytotoxicity assays showed that most viable DPSCs were present at a scaffold concentration of 0.5 mg/ml. The DPSCs on the DBBM scaffold demonstrated a significantly higher proliferation rate of 214.25 ± 16.17 (p < 0.001) cells, enhancing ALP activity level and upregulating of osteogenesis-related genes compared with other two scaffolds. CONCLUSION: DBBP scaffold led to extremely high cell viability, but also promoted proliferation, attachment, and enhanced the osteogenic differentiation capacity of DPSCs, which hold great potential for bone regeneration treatment; however, further studies are necessary. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9890824 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98908242023-02-02 In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds Heitzer, Marius Modabber, Ali Zhang, Xing Winnand, Philipp Zhao, Qun Bläsius, Felix Marius Buhl, Eva Miriam Wolf, Michael Neuss, Sabine Hölzle, Frank Hildebrand, Frank Greven, Johannes BMC Oral Health Research BACKGROUND: A rigorous search for alternatives to autogenous bone grafts to avoid invasiveness at the donor site in the treatment of maxillomandibular bone defects. Researchers have used alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone graft substitutes in clinical studies with varying degrees of success, although their in vitro effects on stem cells remain unclear. Dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) can potentially enhance the bone regeneration of bone graft substitutes. The present in vitro study investigates the osteogenic capability of DPSCs on alloplastic (biphasic calcium phosphate [BCP]), allogeneic (freeze-dried bone allografts [FDBAs]), and xenogeneic (deproteinized bovine bone mineral [DBBM]) bone grafts. METHODS: Human DPSCs were seeded on 0.5 mg/ml, 1 mg/ml, and 2 mg/ml of BCP, FDBA, and DBBM to evaluate the optimal cell growth and cytotoxicity. Scaffolds and cell morphologies were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Calcein AM and cytoskeleton staining were performed to determine cell attachment and proliferation. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and osteogenesis-related genes expressions was used to investigate initial osteogenic differentiation. RESULTS: Cytotoxicity assays showed that most viable DPSCs were present at a scaffold concentration of 0.5 mg/ml. The DPSCs on the DBBM scaffold demonstrated a significantly higher proliferation rate of 214.25 ± 16.17 (p < 0.001) cells, enhancing ALP activity level and upregulating of osteogenesis-related genes compared with other two scaffolds. CONCLUSION: DBBP scaffold led to extremely high cell viability, but also promoted proliferation, attachment, and enhanced the osteogenic differentiation capacity of DPSCs, which hold great potential for bone regeneration treatment; however, further studies are necessary. BioMed Central 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9890824/ /pubmed/36721114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02726-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Heitzer, Marius Modabber, Ali Zhang, Xing Winnand, Philipp Zhao, Qun Bläsius, Felix Marius Buhl, Eva Miriam Wolf, Michael Neuss, Sabine Hölzle, Frank Hildebrand, Frank Greven, Johannes In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title | In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title_full | In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title_fullStr | In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title_full_unstemmed | In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title_short | In vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
title_sort | in vitro comparison of the osteogenic capability of human pulp stem cells on alloplastic, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone scaffolds |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890824/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02726-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT heitzermarius invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT modabberali invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT zhangxing invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT winnandphilipp invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT zhaoqun invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT blasiusfelixmarius invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT buhlevamiriam invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT wolfmichael invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT neusssabine invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT holzlefrank invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT hildebrandfrank invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds AT grevenjohannes invitrocomparisonoftheosteogeniccapabilityofhumanpulpstemcellsonalloplasticallogeneicandxenogeneicbonescaffolds |