3D Printed Controllable Microporous Scaffolds Support Embryonic Development in Vitro

Overview

Journal J Cell Physiol

Specialties Cell Biology
Physiology

Date 2022 Jun 14

PMID 35699648

Authors

Jia Guo

Yuanyuan Li

Zili Gao

Jiawei Lyu

Wenli Liu

Yongchao Duan

Lixun Zhou

Qi Gu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Little is known about the complex molecular and cellular events occurring during implantation, which represents a critical step for pregnancy. The conventional 2D culture could not support postimplantation embryos' normal development, and 3D conditions shed light into the "black box". 3D printing technology has been widely used in recapitulating the structure and function of native tissues in vitro. Here, we 3D printed anisotropic microporous scaffolds to culture embryos by manipulating the advancing angle between printed layers, which affected embryo development. The 30° and 60° scaffolds promote embryo development with moderate embryo-scaffold attachments. T-positive cells and FOXA2-positive cells were observed to appear in the posterior region of the embryo and migrated to the anterior region of the embryo on day 7. These findings demonstrate a 3D printed stand that supports embryonic development in vitro and the critical role of 3D architecture for embryo implantation, in which additive manufacturing is a versatile tool.

Citing Articles

3D printable soft and solvent-free thermoplastic elastomer containing dangling bottlebrush chains.

Asadi V, Dolleman R, van der Gucht J, Kodger T Mater Adv. 2023; 4(22):5535-5545.

PMID: 38013845 PMC: 10642180. DOI: 10.1039/d3ma00335c.

3D printed controllable microporous scaffolds support embryonic development in vitro.

Guo J, Li Y, Gao Z, Lyu J, Liu W, Duan Y J Cell Physiol. 2022; 237(8):3408-3420.

PMID: 35699648 PMC: 9545995. DOI: 10.1002/jcp.30810.

References

Bhattacharjee N, Parra-Cabrera C, Kim Y, Kuo A, Folch A . Desktop-Stereolithography 3D-Printing of a Poly(dimethylsiloxane)-Based Material with Sylgard-184 Properties. Adv Mater. 2018; 30(22):e1800001. PMC: 6286193. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201800001. View

Aplin J, Ruane P . Embryo-epithelium interactions during implantation at a glance. J Cell Sci. 2017; 130(1):15-22. DOI: 10.1242/jcs.175943. View

Menzies K, Jones L . The impact of contact angle on the biocompatibility of biomaterials. Optom Vis Sci. 2010; 87(6):387-99. DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181da863e. View

Wei J, Yoshinari M, Takemoto S, Hattori M, Kawada E, Liu B . Adhesion of mouse fibroblasts on hexamethyldisiloxane surfaces with wide range of wettability. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2006; 81(1):66-75. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30638. View

de Almeida Monteiro Melo Ferraz M, Nagashima J, Venzac B, Le Gac S, Songsasen N . 3D printed mold leachates in PDMS microfluidic devices. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):994. PMC: 6976631. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-57816-y. View

He X . Microscale Biomaterials with Bioinspired Complexity of Early Embryo Development and in the Ovary for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018; 3(11):2692-2701. PMC: 5777354. DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00540. View

Do A, Khorsand B, Geary S, Salem A . 3D Printing of Scaffolds for Tissue Regeneration Applications. Adv Healthc Mater. 2015; 4(12):1742-62. PMC: 4597933. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.201500168. View

Peng K, Liu X, Zhao H, Lu H, Lv F, Liu L . 3D Bioprinting of Reinforced Vessels by Dual-Cross-linked Biocompatible Hydrogels. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2022; 4(5):4549-4556. DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.1c00283. View

Liu X, Wang X, Zhang L, Sun L, Wang H, Zhao H . 3D Liver Tissue Model with Branched Vascular Networks by Multimaterial Bioprinting. Adv Healthc Mater. 2021; 10(23):e2101405. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.202101405. View

10.

Hsu Y . Differentiation in vitro of mouse embryos to the stage of early somite. Dev Biol. 1973; 33(2):403-11. DOI: 10.1016/0012-1606(73)90145-0. View

11.

Hull S, Brunel L, Heilshorn S . 3D Bioprinting of Cell-Laden Hydrogels for Improved Biological Functionality. Adv Mater. 2021; 34(2):e2103691. PMC: 8988886. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202103691. View

12.

Campo H, Cervello I, Simon C . Bioengineering the Uterus: An Overview of Recent Advances and Future Perspectives in Reproductive Medicine. Ann Biomed Eng. 2016; 45(7):1710-1717. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-016-1783-3. View

13.

Zhou X, Nowicki M, Sun H, Hann S, Cui H, Esworthy T . 3D Bioprinting-Tunable Small-Diameter Blood Vessels with Biomimetic Biphasic Cell Layers. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2020; 12(41):45904-45915. DOI: 10.1021/acsami.0c14871. View

14.

Hossain N, Chowdhury M, Shuvho M, Kashem M, Kchaou M . 3D-Printed Objects for Multipurpose Applications. J Mater Eng Perform. 2021; 30(7):4756-4767. PMC: 7996717. DOI: 10.1007/s11665-021-05664-w. View

15.

Govindasamy N, Long H, Jeong H, Raman R, Ozcifci B, Probst S . 3D biomimetic platform reveals the first interactions of the embryo and the maternal blood vessels. Dev Cell. 2021; 56(23):3276-3287.e8. DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2021.10.014. View

16.

Weimar C, Post Uiterweer E, Teklenburg G, Heijnen C, Macklon N . In-vitro model systems for the study of human embryo-endometrium interactions. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013; 27(5):461-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.08.002. View

17.

Gu Z, Guo J, Wang H, Wen Y, Gu Q . Bioengineered microenvironment to culture early embryos. Cell Prolif. 2020; 53(2):e12754. PMC: 7046478. DOI: 10.1111/cpr.12754. View

18.

Harrison S, Sozen B, Christodoulou N, Kyprianou C, Zernicka-Goetz M . Assembly of embryonic and extraembryonic stem cells to mimic embryogenesis in vitro. Science. 2017; 356(6334). DOI: 10.1126/science.aal1810. View

19.

Wang J, Wang L, Feng G, Wang Y, Li Y, Li X . Asymmetric Expression of LincGET Biases Cell Fate in Two-Cell Mouse Embryos. Cell. 2018; 175(7):1887-1901.e18. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.039. View

20.

Plachta N, Bollenbach T, Pease S, Fraser S, Pantazis P . Oct4 kinetics predict cell lineage patterning in the early mammalian embryo. Nat Cell Biol. 2011; 13(2):117-23. DOI: 10.1038/ncb2154. View