journal article·2021-01Open access

Microtopographical patterns promote different responses in fibroblasts and Schwann cells: A possible feature for neural implants

Sahba Mobini, Cary A. Kuliasha, Zachary A. Siders, Nicole A. Bohmann, Syed‐Mustafa Jamal, Jack W. Judy, Christine E. Schmidt, Anthony B. Brennan

Abstract

Abstract The chronic reliability of bioelectronic neural interfaces has been challenged by foreign body reactions (FBRs) resulting in fibrotic encapsulation and poor integration with neural tissue. Engineered microtopographies could alleviate these challenges by manipulating cellular responses to the implanted device. Parallel microchannels have been shown to modulate neuronal cell alignment and axonal growth, and Sharklet™ microtopographies of targeted feature sizes can modulate bio‐adhesion of an array of bacteria, marine organisms, and epithelial cells due to their unique geometry. We hypothesized that a Sharklet™ micropattern could be identified that inhibited fibroblasts partially responsible for FBR while promoting Schwann cell proliferation and alignment. in vitro cell assays were used to screen the effect of Sharklet™ and channel micropatterns of varying dimensions from 2 to 20 μm on fibroblast and Schwann cell metrics (e.g., morphology/alignment, nuclei count, metabolic activity), and a hierarchical analysis of variance was used to compare treatments. In general, Schwann cells were found to be more metabolically active and aligned than fibroblasts when compared between the same pattern. 20 μm wide channels spaced 2 μm apart were found to promote Schwann cell attachment and alignment while simultaneously inhibiting fibroblasts and warrant further in vivo study on neural interface devices. No statistically significant trends between cellular responses and geometrical parameters were identified because mammalian cells can change their morphology dependent on their environment in a manner dissimilar to bacteria. Our results showed although surface patterning is a strong physical tool for modulating cell behavior, responses to micropatterns are highly dependent on the cell type.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Neuroscience and Neural Engineering · 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Planarian Biology and Electrostimulation

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA

Instituto de Micro y Nanotecnología IMN‐CNM, CSIC (CEI UAM+CSIC) Madrid Spain

Departamento de Biología Molecular and Centro de Biología Molecular “Severo Ochoa” (UAM‐CSIC) Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Madrid Spain

Nanoscience Institute for Medical and Engineering Technology University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Program, School of Forest Resources and Conservation University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA

Materials Science and Engineering Department University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA

Funding

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

References (67)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.smim.2007.11.00410.1016/j.smim.2007.11.004 ↗
2. 10.1021/bm101348710.1021/bm1013487 ↗
3. 10.3389/fncel.2017.0034710.3389/fncel.2017.00347 ↗
4. Bray D. · 2000 · 235
5. 10.1163/15685620778149441210.1163/156856207781494412 ↗
6. 10.3390/mi909043010.3390/mi9090430 ↗
7. 10.1080/0892701050048485410.1080/08927010500484854 ↗
8. 10.1116/1.275140510.1116/1.2751405 ↗
9. 10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00144-010.1016/S0142-9612(97)00144-0 ↗
10. 10.1002/jbm.a.3627410.1002/jbm.a.36274 ↗
11. 10.1021/la402952u10.1021/la402952u ↗
12. 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2018.05.00510.1016/j.bioactmat.2018.05.005 ↗
13. 10.3389/fmats.2018.0006210.3389/fmats.2018.00062 ↗
14. 10.1142/710910.1142/7109 ↗
15. 10.1214/ss/117701113610.1214/ss/1177011136 ↗
16. 10.3389/fnbot.2017.0005910.3389/fnbot.2017.00059 ↗
17. 10.1186/s42234-018-0010-y10.1186/s42234-018-0010-y ↗
18. 10.1002/adfm.20060066910.1002/adfm.200600669 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.04.00310.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.04.003 ↗
20. 10.1177/175628560933938210.1177/1756285609339382 ↗
21. 10.3389/fnins.2016.0059910.3389/fnins.2016.00599 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.conb.2017.10.00310.1016/j.conb.2017.10.003 ↗
23. 10.1146/annurev.neuro.051508.13524110.1146/annurev.neuro.051508.135241 ↗
24. 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-10535110.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105351 ↗
25. 10.3390/mi803008310.3390/mi8030083 ↗
26. 10.1002/jbm.a.3525410.1002/jbm.a.35254 ↗
27. 10.1046/j.1469-7580.2002.00046.x10.1046/j.1469-7580.2002.00046.x ↗
28. 10.1113/JP27087410.1113/JP270874 ↗
29. 10.3389/fncel.2019.0003310.3389/fncel.2019.00033 ↗
30. 10.1101/cshperspect.a02048710.1101/cshperspect.a020487 ↗
31. 10.1155/2016/707691010.1155/2016/7076910 ↗
32. Kellner K. · 2019
33. 10.3389/fphar.2014.0012310.3389/fphar.2014.00123 ↗
34. 10.1002/jbm.a.3269810.1002/jbm.a.32698 ↗
35. 10.3390/mi710017910.3390/mi7100179 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.03.03410.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.03.034 ↗
37. Kuliasha C. A. &Judy J. W.(2018).In vitro Reactive‐Accelerated‐Aging (RAA) Assessment of Tissue‐Engineered Electronic Nerve Interfaces (TEENI). Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc.2018 5061–5064.https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2018.8513458.10.1109/EMBC.2018.8513458 ↗
38. 10.3389/fnins.2017.0051310.3389/fnins.2017.00513 ↗
39. 10.1101/cshperspect.a01921610.1101/cshperspect.a019216 ↗
40. 10.3389/fnins.2017.0049710.3389/fnins.2017.00497 ↗
41. 10.1167/tvst.4.2.910.1167/tvst.4.2.9 ↗
42. 10.1186/2047-2994-3-2810.1186/2047-2994-3-28 ↗
43. 10.1002/adhm.20170026710.1002/adhm.201700267 ↗
44. 10.1186/s40169-015-0050-910.1186/s40169-015-0050-9 ↗
45. 10.1371/journal.pone.002431610.1371/journal.pone.0024316 ↗
46. Mitchell‐Innes A. · 2018 · 105
47. 10.1016/j.cobme.2017.10.01010.1016/j.cobme.2017.10.010 ↗
48. 10.1159/00037032410.1159/000370324 ↗
49. Ordonez J. S. Boehler C. Schuettler M. &Stieglitz T.(2012).Improved polyimide thin‐film electrodes for neural implants. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc.2012 5134–5137.https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2012.6347149.10.1109/EMBC.2012.6347149 ↗
50. Relevance of topographic parameters on the adhesion and proliferation of human gingival fibroblasts and oral bacterial strains10.1155/2019/8456342 ↗
51. 10.1890/00-063410.1890/00-0634 ↗
52. 10.1038/s41591-019-0567-310.1038/s41591-019-0567-3 ↗
53. 10.1002/ana.2538410.1002/ana.25384 ↗
54. 10.1002/jbm.a.3441710.1002/jbm.a.34417 ↗
55. 10.1007/s10439-015-1431-310.1007/s10439-015-1431-3 ↗
56. 10.1039/C4BM00375F10.1039/C4BM00375F ↗
57. Schmalenberg K. E. &Uhrich K. E.(2005).Micropatterned polymer substrates control alignment of proliferating Schwann cells to direct neuronal regeneration. Biomaterials.26(12): 1423–1430.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.04.046.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.04.046 ↗
58. 10.1002/adfm.20170171310.1002/adfm.201701713 ↗
59. Biological sample preparation by high‐pressure freezing, microwave‐assisted contrast enhancement, and minimal resin embedding for volume imaging
60. 10.3390/mi909044310.3390/mi9090443 ↗
61. 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.07.03110.1016/j.actbio.2017.07.031 ↗
62. 10.1109/TBME.2014.231473310.1109/TBME.2014.2314733 ↗
63. 10.1016/0169-7439(87)80084-910.1016/0169-7439(87)80084-9 ↗
64. 10.4103/1673-5374.20500010.4103/1673-5374.205000 ↗
65. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.01.01410.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.01.014 ↗
66. 10.1128/MMBR.00031-1510.1128/MMBR.00031-15 ↗
67. 10.1155/2018/102196910.1155/2018/1021969 ↗