摘要：Abstract The nanostructure of engineered bioscaffolds has a profound impact on cell response, yet its understanding remains incomplete as cells interact with a highly complex interfacial layer rather than the material itself. For bioactive glass scaffolds, this layer comprises of silica gel, hydroxyapatite (HA)/carbonated hydroxyapatite (CHA), and absorbed proteins—all in varying micro/nano structure, composition, and concentration. Here, we examined the response of MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblast cells to 30 mol% CaO–70 mol% SiO 2 porous bioactive glass monoliths that differed only in nanopore size (6–44 nm) yet resulted in the formation of HA/CHA layers with significantly different microstructures. We report that cell response, as quantified by cell attachment and morphology, does not correlate with nanopore size, nor HA/CHO layer micro/nano morphology, or absorbed protein amount (bovine serum albumin, BSA), but with BSA’s secondary conformation as indicated by its β-sheet/α-helix ratio. Our results suggest that the β-sheet structure in BSA interacts electrostatically with the HA/CHA interfacial layer and activates the RGD sequence of absorbed adhesion proteins, such as fibronectin and vitronectin, thus significantly enhancing the attachment of cells. These findings provide new insight into the interaction of cells with the scaffolds’ interfacial layer, which is vital for the continued development of engineered tissue scaffolds.
其他摘要：Abstract The nanostructure of engineered bioscaffolds has a profound impact on cell response, yet its understanding remains incomplete as cells interact with a highly complex interfacial layer rather than the material itself. For bioactive glass scaffolds, this layer comprises of silica gel, hydroxyapatite (HA)/carbonated hydroxyapatite (CHA), and absorbed proteins—all in varying micro/nano structure, composition, and concentration. Here, we examined the response of MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblast cells to 30 mol% CaO–70 mol% SiO 2 porous bioactive glass monoliths that differed only in nanopore size (6–44 nm) yet resulted in the formation of HA/CHA layers with significantly different microstructures. We report that cell response, as quantified by cell attachment and morphology, does not correlate with nanopore size, nor HA/CHO layer micro/nano morphology, or absorbed protein amount (bovine serum albumin, BSA), but with BSA’s secondary conformation as indicated by its β-sheet/α-helix ratio. Our results suggest that the β-sheet structure in BSA interacts electrostatically with the HA/CHA interfacial layer and activates the RGD sequence of absorbed adhesion proteins, such as fibronectin and vitronectin, thus significantly enhancing the attachment of cells. These findings provide new insight into the interaction of cells with the scaffolds’ interfacial layer, which is vital for the continued development of engineered tissue scaffolds.
