In vivo study of dual functionalized mussel-derived bioactive peptides promoting 3D-printed porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds for repair of rabbit femoral defects
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online November, 2022
In vivo study of dual functionalized mussel-derived bioactive peptides promoting 3D-printed porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds for repair of rabbit femoral defects
The 3D printed porous titanium alloy scaffolds are beneficial to enhance angiogenesis, osteoblast adhesion, and promote osseointegration. However, titanium alloys are biologically inert, which makes the bond between the implant and bone tissue weak and prone to loosening. Inspired by the natural biological marine mussels, we designed four-claw-shaped mussel-derived bioactive peptides for the decoration of porous titanium alloy scaffolds: adhesion peptide-DOPA, anchoring peptide-RGD and osteogenic-inducing peptide-BMP-2. And the bifunctionalization of 3D-printed porous titanium alloy scaffolds was evaluated in vivo in a rabbit model of bone defect with excellent promotion of osseointegration and mechanical stability. Our results show that the in vivo osseointegration ability of the modified 3D printed porous titanium alloy test piece is significantly improved, and the bifunctional polypeptide coating group E has the strongest osseointegration ability. In conclusion, our experimental design partially solves the problems of stress shielding effect and biological inertness, and provides a convenient and feasible method for the clinical application of titanium alloy implants in biomedical implant materials.
LiZKawashitaM. Current progress in inorganic artificial biomaterials. J Artificial Organs: The Official Journal Jpn Soc Artif Organs2011; 14: 163–170. DOI: 10.1007/s10047-011-0585-5.
3.
ClavellRSde LlanoJJCardaC, et al.In vitro assessment of the biological response of Ti6Al4V implants coated with hydroxyapatite microdomains. J Biomedical Materials Research A2016; 104: 2723–2729. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.35817.
4.
ZaharinHAAbdul RaniAMAzamFI, et al.Effect of unit cell type and pore size on porosity and mechanical behavior of additively manufactured Ti6Al4V Scaffolds. Materials2018; 11: 2402. DOI: 10.3390/ma11122402.
5.
ZhangWWangGLiuY, et al.The synergistic effect of hierarchical micro/nano-topography and bioactive ions for enhanced osseointegration. Biomaterials2013; 34: 3184–3195. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.01.008.
6.
SpeceHBasgulCAndrewsCE, et al.A systematic review of preclinical in vivo testing of 3D printed porous Ti6Al4V for orthopedic applications, part I: Animal models and bone ingrowth outcome measures. J Biomedical Materials Research B, Appl Biomaterials2021; 109: 1436–1454. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.34803.
7.
XuJWengXJWangX, et al.Potential use of porous titanium-niobium alloy in orthopedic implants: preparation and experimental study of its biocompatibility in vitro. Plos One2013; 8: e79289. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0079289.
8.
DengFLiuLLiZ, et al.3D printed Ti6Al4V bone scaffolds with different pore structure effects on bone ingrowth. J Biological Engineering2021; 15: 4. DOI: 10.1186/s13036-021-00255-8.
9.
WangQWengYPLiuHW, et al.3D printing titanium alloy scaffolds with different pore sizes to repair rabbit femoral defects: 600μm pore size is more conducive to osseointegration. China Tissue Eng Res2021; 25: 4441–4446.
10.
RanQYangWHuY, et al.Osteogenesis of 3D printed porous Ti6Al4V implants with different pore sizes. J Mechanical Behavior Biomedical Materials2018; 84: 1–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.04.010.
11.
DiamantiMVDel CurtoBPedeferriM, et al.Anodic oxidation of titanium: from technical aspects to biomedical applications. J Applied Biomaterials Biomechanics: JABB2011; 9: 55–69. DOI: 10.5301/JABB.2011.7429.
12.
GoriainovVCookR, Bone and metal: an orthopaedic perspective on osseointegration of metals. Acta Biomaterialia2014; 10: 4043–4057. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.06.004.
13.
BeckerMSchmiedFKademLF, et al.Single-cell adhesion of human osteoblasts on plasma-conditioned titanium implant surfaces in vitro. J Mechanical Behavior Biomedical Materials2020; 109: 103841. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103841.
14.
SouzaJCMSordiMBKanazawaM, et al.Nano-scale modification of titanium implant surfaces to enhance osseointegration. Acta Biomaterialia2019; 94: 112–131. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.045.
15.
BrubakerCEMessersmithPB. The present and future of biologically inspired adhesive interfaces and materials. Langmuir: The ACS Journal Surfaces Colloids2012; 28: 2200–2205. DOI: 10.1021/la300044v.
16.
LeeYBShinYMLeeJH, et al.Polydopamine-mediated immobilization of multiple bioactive molecules for the development of functional vascular graft materials. Biomaterials2012; 33: 8343–8352. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.08.011.
17.
HwangDSHarringtonMJLuQ, et al.Mussel foot protein-1 (mcfp-1) interaction with titania surfaces. J Materials Chemistry2012; 22: 15530–15533. DOI: 10.1039/C2JM32439C.
18.
AyeSSLiRBoyd-MossM, et al.Scaffolds Formed via the Non-Equilibrium Supramolecular Assembly of the Synergistic ECM Peptides RGD and PHSRN Demonstrate Improved Cell Attachment in 3D. Polymers2018; 10: 690. DOI: 10.3390/polym10070690.
19.
WangFLiYShenY, et al.The functions and applications of RGD in tumor therapy and tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci2013; 14: 13447–13462. DOI: 10.3390/ijms140713447.
20.
AlipourMBaneshiMHosseinkhaniS, et al.Recent progress in biomedical applications of RGD-based ligand: From precise cancer theranostics to biomaterial engineering: A systematic review. J Biomedical Materials Research Part A2020; 108: 839–850. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.36862.
21.
YangMZhangZCLiuY, et al.Function and Mechanism of RGD in Bone and Cartilage Tissue Engineering. Front Bioengineering Biotechnology2021; 9: 773636. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.773636.
22.
BellisSL. Advantages of RGD peptides for directing cell association with biomaterials. Biomaterials2011; 32: 4205–4210. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.02.029.
23.
HalloranDDurbanoHWNoheA, et al.Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 in Development and Bone Homeostasis. J Developmental Biology2020; 8: 19. DOI: 10.3390/jdb8030019.
24.
BragdonBMoseychukOSaldanhaS, et al.Bone morphogenetic proteins: a critical review. Cell Signalling2011; 23: 609–620. DOI: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2010.10.003.
25.
ZhouPWuJXiaY, et al.Loading BMP-2 on nanostructured hydroxyapatite microspheres for rapid bone regeneration. Int Journal Nanomedicine2018; 13: 4083–4092. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S158280.
26.
JamesAWLaChaudGShenJ, et al.A Review of the Clinical Side Effects of Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2. Tissue engineering Part B. Reviews2016; 22: 284–297. DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEB.2015.0357.
27.
AgarwalRGarciaAJ. Biomaterial strategies for engineering implants for enhanced osseointegration and bone repair. Adv Drug Delivery Reviews2015; 94: 53–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2015.03.013.
28.
ChienSYTsaiCHLiuSC, et al.Noggin Inhibits IL-1beta and BMP-2 Expression, and Attenuates Cartilage Degeneration and Subchondral Bone Destruction in Experimental Osteoarthritis. Cells2020; 9: 927. DOI: 10.3390/cells9040927.
29.
ZhaoHHuangYZhangW, et al.Mussel-Inspired Peptide Coatings on Titanium Implant to Improve Osseointegration in Osteoporotic Condition. ACS Biomaterials Science Engineering2018; 4: 2505–2515. DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b00261.
30.
PanGSunSZhangW, et al.Biomimetic Design of Mussel-Derived Bioactive Peptides for Dual-Functionalization of Titanium-Based Biomaterials. J Am Chem Soc2016; 138: 15078–15086. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.6b09770.
31.
YuTGaoHLiuT, et al.Effects of immediately static loading on osteointegration and osteogenesis around 3D-printed porous implant: A histological and biomechanical study. Mater Science Engineering C, Mater Biological Applications2020; 108: 110406. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2019.110406.
32.
MehtaMSchmidt-BleekKDudaGN, et al.Biomaterial delivery of morphogens to mimic the natural healing cascade in bone. Adv Drug Delivery Reviews2012; 64: 1257–1276. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.05.006.
33.
HarrisJSBemenderferTBWesselAR, et al.A review of mouse critical size defect models in weight bearing bones. Bone2013; 55: 241–247. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2013.02.002.
34.
BakhtiaryNLiuCGhorbaniF, et al.Bioactive Inks Development for Osteochondral Tissue Engineering: A Mini-Review. Gels2021; 7: 274. DOI: 10.3390/gels7040274.
35.
GruskinEDollBAFutrellFW, et al.Demineralized bone matrix in bone repair: history and use. Adv Drug Delivery Reviews2012; 64: 1063–1077. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.06.008.
36.
XiaoMChenYMBiaoMN, et al.Bio-functionalization of biomedical metals. Mater Science Engineering C, Mater Biological Applications2017; 70: 1057–1070. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2016.06.067.
37.
LiYYangCZhaoH, et al.New Developments of Ti-Based Alloys for Biomedical Applications. Materials2014; 7: 1709–1800. DOI: 10.3390/ma7031709.
38.
CarrageeEJHurwitzELWeinerBK, et al.A critical review of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spinal surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned. Spine Journal : Official Journal North Am Spine Soc2011; 11: 471–491. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.04.023.
39.
LiJYuanHChandrakarA, et al.3D porous Ti6Al4V-beta-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds directly fabricated by additive manufacturing. Acta Biomaterialia2021; 126: 496–510. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2021.03.021.
40.
ReznikovNChaseHBen ZviY, et al.Inter-trabecular angle: A parameter of trabecular bone architecture in the human proximal femur that reveals underlying topological motifs. Acta Biomaterialia2016; 44: 65–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.08.040.
41.
ZhaoPWangJLiY, et al.Microfluidic Technology for the Production of Well-Ordered Porous Polymer Scaffolds. Polymers2020; 12: 1863. DOI: 10.3390/polym12091863.
42.
TrevisanFCalignanoFAversaA, et al.Additive manufacturing of titanium alloys in the biomedical field: processes, properties and applications. J Applied Biomaterials Functional Materials2018; 16: 57–67. DOI: 10.5301/jabfm.5000371.
43.
LvYWangBLiuG, et al.Metal material, properties and design methods of porous biomedical scaffolds for additive manufacturing: A review. Front Bioengineering Biotechnology2021; 9. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.641130.
44.
HearyRFParvathreddyNSampathS, et al.Elastic modulus in the selection of interbody implants. J Spine Surgery2017; 3: 163–167. DOI: 10.21037/jss.2017.05.01.
45.
PengWMLiuYFJiangXF, et al.Bionic mechanical design and 3D printing of novel porous Ti6Al4V implants for biomedical applications. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B2019; 20: 647–659. DOI: 10.1631/jzus.B1800622.
46.
GaoPFanBYuX, et al.Biofunctional magnesium coated Ti6Al4V scaffold enhances osteogenesis and angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo for orthopedic application. Bioactive Materials2020; 5: 680–693. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.04.019.
47.
MjobergB. Hip prosthetic loosening: A very personal review. World Journal Orthopedics2021; 12: 629–639. DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v12.i9.629.
48.
BijukumarDRMcGeehanCMathewMT, et al.Regenerative medicine strategies in biomedical implants. Curr Osteoporosis Reports2018; 16: 236–245. DOI: 10.1007/s11914-018-0441-0.
49.
BilemIChevallierPPlawinskiL, et al.RGD and BMP-2 mimetic peptide crosstalk enhances osteogenic commitment of human bone marrow stem cells. Acta Biomaterialia2016; 36: 132–142. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.03.032.
50.
MohanLDurgalakshmiDGeethaM. Electrophoretic deposition of nanocomposite (HAp+ TiO2) on titanium alloy for biomedical applications. Ceramics Int2012; 38: 3435–3443.
51.
EghiaianFRicoFColomA, et al.High-speed atomic force microscopy: imaging and force spectroscopy. FEBS Letters2014; 588: 3631–3638. DOI: 10.1016/j.febslet.2014.06.028.
52.
ZhaoJGaoFPujariSP, et al.Universal calibration of computationally predicted N 1s binding energies for interpretation of XPS experimental measurements. Langmuir: The ACS Journal Surfaces Colloids2017; 33: 10792–10799. DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b02301.
53.
CoolsPAsadianMNicolausW, et al.Surface Treatment of PEOT/PBT (55/45) with a Dielectric Barrier Discharge in Air, Helium, Argon and Nitrogen at Medium Pressure. Materials2018; 11: 391. DOI: 10.3390/ma11030391.
54.
GuoJLKimYSOrchardEA, et al.A Rabbit Femoral Condyle Defect Model for Assessment of Osteochondral Tissue Regeneration. Tissue Engineering C Methods2020; 26: 554–564. DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEC.2020.0261.
