Page 100 - IJB-10-3
P. 100

International Journal of Bioprinting                       3D bioprinting for vascularized skin tissue engineering




            be sufficient for vascularization owing to the adequate   shown in Figure 3A. 38,39,41,42,44,46-53  Non-hypoxic and hypoxic
            capillary proximity,  which allows proper nutrition, gas   groups have been developed using gelatin-based hydrogels
            exchange, and metabolite diffusion. The transplantation   for better understanding in vivo cluster-based angiogenesis
            of large tissue constructs can be dangerous because of the   mechanisms, including EPC functions. Hypoxic hydrogels
            risk of ischemia during implantation. 38,39,41-45  The effective   allowed EPCs and endothelial colony-forming cells
            growth and support of implanted tissue require a sufficient   (ECFCs) to proliferate and stabilize, whereas non-hypoxic
            supply of nutrients and oxygen, as well as the removal of   hydrogels prevented the formation of clusters. The GFP-
            waste products through blood vessels. Cells and tissues in   ECFCs that were injected intravenously showed significant
            close proximity to capillaries or within a distance of 100–  function.  The  in vivo  oxygen  levels  were  regulated  by
            200 µm are required for long-term growth and support, as   incorporating calcium hydroxide along with calcium













































            Figure 3. (A) Demonstration of cell viability at varying distances from a microvascular network in a thick scaffold. (B) Encapsulation of hypoxic and non-
            hypoxic cells. (C) Morphology of cells in hypoxic and non-hypoxic hydrogels for up to 48 h, captured by using bright-field photography. The clustering
            morphology of hypoxic hydrogels becomes clear after 6–12 h of culturing and can continue to grow for up to 48 h. In contrast, endothelial colony-forming
            cells (ECFCs) embedded in non-hypoxic hydrogels expand outward and sprout without forming clusters. (D) O  concentration measured at the bottom
                                                                                    2
            of the gel during 4 d of culturing. Cluster development dynamics in hypoxic hydrogels confirmed by performing (E) time-lapse microscopy and (F) later
            measurement of multiple cells within clusters (top) compared with individual cells (bottom). No clustering is observed in non-hypoxic hydrogels (G and
            H). (I) Injection of SDF-1-laden non-hypoxic and hypoxic hydrogels into the flanks of nude mice after intracardial injection of GFP-ECFCs. (J) GFP-
            ECFCs exhibiting single-cell spindle (i) and spherical (ii) shapes in non-hypoxic hydrogels 12 h after injection. Additionally, host cells (GS-IB4 lectin) are
            observed as solitary spherical cells. In hypoxic conditions, GFP-ECFCs form clusters (iii and iv) and exhibit sprouting cells (iii). Host cells also exhibit
            cluster structures under hypoxic conditions (iii and iv). (K) Measurements confirming that the total number of cells is comparable between the hypoxic
            and non-hypoxic conditions, whereas (L) the percentage of area occupied by clusters is slightly higher in the hypoxic setting. (M) Clusters in hypoxic
            environments are larger than those in normoxic environments. (N) GFP-ECFCs injected into the coronary arteries of nude mice’s hearts, followed by
            injection of SDF-1-filled hypoxic (ctl) and non-hypoxic (DPI) hydrogels into the flanks of the mice. (O) GFP-ECFCs are observed as individual cells (ii
            and iii) and clusters (i and iv) in both conditions for 12 h after encapsulation. (P) The untreated (control) group has more GFP  cells than the DPI-treated
                                                                                            +
            group, while (Q) the percentage of area occupied by clusters is higher for the control group than for the DPI-treated group. (R) Average cluster sizes do not
            differ significantly between the two groups. Figure 3B–R were reprinted from  (Copyright © 2019, with permission from AAAS).
                                                             54
            Volume 10 Issue 3 (2024)                        92                                doi: 10.36922/ijb.1727
   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105