Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016:2016:7363579.
doi: 10.1155/2016/7363579. Epub 2016 May 16.

An Optimized Injectable Hydrogel Scaffold Supports Human Dental Pulp Stem Cell Viability and Spreading

Affiliations

An Optimized Injectable Hydrogel Scaffold Supports Human Dental Pulp Stem Cell Viability and Spreading

T D Jones et al. Adv Med. 2016.

Abstract

Introduction. HyStem-C™ is a commercially available injectable hydrogel composed of polyethylene glycol diacrylate (PEGDA), hyaluronan (HA), and gelatin (Gn). These components can be mechanically tuned to enhance cell viability and spreading. Methods. The concentration of PEGDA with an added disulfide bond (PEGSSDA) was varied from 0.5 to 8.0% (w/v) to determine the optimal concentration for injectable clinical application. We evaluated the cell viability of human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs) embedded in 2% (w/v) PEGSSDA-HA-Gn hydrogels. Volume ratios of HA : Gn from 100 : 0 to 25 : 75 were varied to encourage hDPSC spreading. Fibronectin (Fn) was added to our model to determine the effect of extracellular matrix protein concentration on hDPSC behavior. Results. Our preliminary data suggests that the hydrogel gelation time decreased as the PEGSSDA cross-linker concentration increased. The PEGSSDA-HA-Gn was biocompatible with hDPSCs, and increased ratios of HA : Gn enhanced cell viability for 14 days. Additionally, cell proliferation with added fibronectin increased significantly over time at concentrations of 1.0 and 10.0 μg/mL in PEGDA-HA-Gn hydrogels, while cell spreading significantly increased at Fn concentrations of 0.1 μg/mL. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that PEG-based injectable hydrogels maintain hDPSC viability and facilitate cell spreading, mainly in the presence of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Gelation time as a function of PEGSSDA concentration fit to a nonlinear logarithmic regression model. Diamonds represent experimental data. The curved line is theoretical data.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Immunofluorescence results for live/dead staining of human dental pulp stem cells embedded in 2.0% (w/v) PEGSSDA and varying (v/v) ratios of HA : GN. Green = live cells. Red = dead cells. Magnification = 20x. Scale bar = 100 μm.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a-b) The average number of live and dead hDPSC per field of view as a function of (v/v) ratio of HA : GN. (c) The percentage of live hDPSC in the 1 : 1 and 1 : 3 (v/v) ratios of HA : GN. p < 0.05.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Proliferation of hDPSC in PEGDA-HA modified hydrogels with different concentrations of fibronectin. n = 3 samples. WST-1 was used to determine the relative cell densities at days 1 and 4. p < 0.05.
Figure 5
Figure 5
(a–j) Immunofluorescence staining results of human dental pulp stem cells seeded on the surface of polyethylene glycol diacrylate-based hydrogels. Data represents a sample of a random field of view from 4 random fields of view per hydrogel. Green = live cells. Magnification = 20x. Scale bar = 50 μm.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Effect of fibronectin concentration on hDPSC rounding. Data represents an average of 40 cells/field of view at 20x magnification. n = 3 samples. p < 0.05.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Effect of fibronectin concentration on hDPSC spreading. Data represents an average of 40 cells/field of view at 20x magnification. n = 3 samples. p < 0.05.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Zadik Y., Sandler V., Bechor R., Salehrabi R. Analysis of factors related to extraction of endodontically treated teeth. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontology. 2008;106(5):e31–e35. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.06.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Friedman S., Abitbol S., Lawrence H. P. Treatment outcome in endodontics: the Toronto Study. Phase 1: initial treatment. Journal of Endodontics. 2003;29(12):787–793. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200312000-00001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sakai V. T., Cordeiro M. M., Dong Z., Zhang Z., Zeitlin B. D., Nör J. E. Tooth slice/scaffold model of dental pulp tissue engineering. Advances in Dental Research. 2011;23(3):325–332. doi: 10.1177/0022034511405325. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mao J. J., Kim S. G., Zhou J., et al. Regenerative endodontics: barriers and strategies for clinical translation. Dental Clinics of North America. 2012;56(3):639–649. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2012.05.005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ng Y.-L., Mann V., Gulabivala K. Outcome of secondary root canal treatment: a systematic review of the literature. International Endodontic Journal. 2008;41(12):1026–1046. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01484.x. - DOI - PubMed