Page 151 - IJB-8-3
P. 151

Tang, et al.
           according to the same model and parameters as control   GelMA solution without the process of 3D bioprinting. We
           groups. All constructs were cultured for 4 days in vitro   extracted the first and the second right maxillary molars,
           before implantation experiments.                    and then prepared the alveolar socket into a 1.0 × 2.0 ×
                                                               1.5 mm  bone defect with a dental implant machine.
                                                                     3
           2.6. Live/dead cell viability assay                 No implant was used to fill the bone defect in the blank
           The viability  of HERS or DPCs  cells encapsulated  in   group while the four other groups implanted constructs
           GelMA hydrogel was tested by Live/Dead  Viability/  matching the alveolar socket defect before suture.  The
           Cytotoxicity  Assay Kit for  Animal  Cells  (KeyGEN,   digital X-ray films were taken before and after surgery.
           China)  after  1, 4, and 7  days of incubation  according   After 8 weeks, samples were collected and treated with
           to the manufacturer’s  instructions (n = 4). Live and   4% paraformaldehyde for 24 h, then decalcified with 10%
           dead cells were observed under laser scanning confocal   ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid for 7 weeks. All specimens
           microscope. The quantity of cells was counted through   were embedded with paraffin for further analysis.
           Image J software and the cell viability was quantified by   2.11. Histological and immunohistochemical
           calculating the proportion of living cells among all cells.  staining
           2.7. Cell labeling                                  5 μm thick tissue sections were prepared for hematoxylin

           Vybrant™ DiI and DiO cell-labeling solution (Thermo   and eosin, Masson and immunohistochemical staining. All
           Scientific, USA) are commonly used cell tracers in cell-  samples were treated in accordance with manufacturer’s
           cell fusion, cellular adhesion, and migration research due to   recommended protocols. Primary antibodies used in this
           their low cytotoxicity and high stability. To investigate the   work consisted of COL-Ⅰ (1:200, ab270993, Abcam), OCN
           interaction between HERS cells and DPCs loaded in GelMA,   (1:500,  ab93876,  Abcam),  RUNX-2  (1:500,  ab76956,
           the two kinds of cells were dyed by DiI and DiO solutions   Abcam), and DSPP (1:500, 508413, Zen Bioscience).
           separately according to the experimental protocols. First,   Briefly,  specimens  were  deparaffined  and  hydrated  by
           we added the cell-labeling solution into serum-free alpha-  dimethylbenzene  and ethanol, then  permeabilized  with
           minimum essential medium with the concentration of 5 μL/  0.1% Triton X-100, treated with citrate antigen retrieval
           mL. Then cells were suspended by the working solution at   solution and blocked with 10% goat serum before
           a density of 1 × 10 /mL and incubated for 15–20 min at   incubated  with  primary  antibodies  in  a  moist  chamber
                           6
           37°C. Finally, we resuspended cells in warm medium after   overnight at 4°C. After incubating secondary antibodies
           the treatment of centrifugation at 1200 rpm for 5 min and   for 1–2 h at 37°C, DAB kit (Gene Tech, China) was used
           repeated the procedure twice before viewing the cells under   as a coloration solution and all slices were observed under
           fluorescence microscope (Olympus, IX73, Japan).     light microscope (BX43F Olympus, Japan).
           2.8. Microscopic evaluation of constructs           2.12. Statistical analysis

           GelMA  scaffold  was  dehydrated  by  gradient  alcohol   All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 24.0
           to  remove  its  aqueous  phase.  Then  the  scaffold  was   (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Student’s t-test was used
                                                               to compare the differences between two groups and one-
           inspected under a scanning electron microscopy (SEM,
           Inspect F, FEI, USA) for microscopic observation.   way analysis of variance  was performed  to  assess the
                                                               discrepancies  between  multiple  groups.  P  < 0.05 was
           2.9. Quantitative measurements of cell number       considered statistically significant.
           and cell confluence                                 3. Results
           Cell convergence, the percentage of cell area in culture
           dish, was one of the main parameters in cell culture in vitro   3.1. Immunofluorescence measurements
           and usually used to assess cell proliferation [33,34] . In this   The primary HERS cells grown in clusters with
           study, we counted the cell number and cell confluence by   a cobblestone appearance under light microscope
           Image J software (n = 4).                           (Figure 2A, a). HERS cells expressed both epithelial cell
                                                               marker  CK14  and mesenchymal  cell  marker  Vimentin,
           2.10. Alveolar socket transplantation in SD rats    which  were  identified  by  immunofluorescence  assay,
           8-week-old female SD rats (210–240  g) were used for   indicating that they had the properties of epithelial and
           alveolar socket transplantation experiment (n = 4). The   mesenchymal cells at the same time (Figure 2A, b and c).
           experimental groups were designed as blank, DPCs    3.2. Viability of the cells encapsulated in GelMA
           (3D bioprinting), HERS (3D bioprinting), HERS+DPCs
           (3D bioprinting), and HERS+DPCs (mixed).  The last   The cell viability of HERS cells (Figure 2B) and DPCs
           group mixed HERS cells and DPCs at a ratio of 1:2 in   (Figure S2) was evaluated  by Live/Dead  assays after
                                       International Journal of Bioprinting (2022)–Volume 8, Issue 3       143
   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156