Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T10:23:15.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Controlling Diffusion of Solutes Through Ionically Crosslinked Alginate Hydrogels Designed for Tissue Engineering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Catherine K. Kuo and
Peter X. Ma
Catherine K. Kuo
Affiliation:
Department of Biologic and Materials Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1078, USAMacromolecular Science and Engineering Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Peter X. Ma
Affiliation:
Department of Biologic and Materials Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1078, USAMacromolecular Science and Engineering Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MIDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Get access

Abstract

Tissue engineering aims at creating new tissues as alternatives to organ transplants. Our approach is to incorporate cells into biodegradable polymer scaffolds designed to temporarily support new tissue formation. An important requirement of scaffolds is homogeneity. Homogeneity ensures structural integrity, uniform distribution of cells, and uniform porosity throughout the scaffold. Controlling pore sizes is necessary to regulate exchange of nutrients and waste products for cells. Pores too large can provide entryway to immune cells that can harm allogenic cells and developing tissue. We have fabricated three-dimensionally defined, homogeneous, ionically crosslinked alginate gels with a controlled slow-gelation system involving CaCO3 and D-glucono-δ-lactone. We varied the structural parameters and alginate types of these gels to control the diffusion of glucose, vitamin B12 and FITC-dextran (molecular weights of 180, 1355 and 9500, respectively) through the gels. Experiments were performed with gel discs placed between side-by-side donor and receptor chambers in a humidified incubator at 37°C. Samples were taken periodically and measured on a UV-Vis spectrophotometer. Generally, diffusion coefficient (D) increased with decreasing solute size. Varying structural parameters of the gels did not have a significant effect on diffusivity of vitamin B12. In contrast, for gels made with a Ca2+ to carboxyl molar ratio of 0.36, D of FITCdextran increased from (2.88 ± 0.52)×10-7 to (4.66 ± 0.48)×10-7 cm2/sec as alginate concentration decreased from 3.2% to 1.5%, respectively. D of FITC-dextran also increased from (3.17 ± 0.30)×10-7 to (4.66 ± 0.48)×10-7 cm2/sec as crosslinking density decreased for 1.5% alginate gels from a Ca2+ to carboxyl molar ratio of 0.72 to 0.36, respectively. D was highest for alginate gels with the highest guluronic acid content. Controlling diffusivity allows alginate gels with specific properties to be fabricated for tissue engineering scaffolding and other biomedical applications.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Langer, R. and Vacanti, J., Science. 260, 920–926 (1993).Google Scholar
2. Ma, P. X., Zhang, R., Xiao, G., and Franceschi, R., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 54, 284–293 (2001).Google Scholar
3. Zhang, R. and Ma, P. X., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 45, 285–293 (1999).Google Scholar
4. Zhang, R. and Ma, P. X., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 44, 446–455 (1999).Google Scholar
5. Kuo, C. K. and Ma, P. X., Biomater. 22(6), 511–521 (2001).Google Scholar
6. Kuo, C. K. and Ma, P. X. in Ionically crosslinked alginate hydrogels as scaffolds for tissue engineering, (Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Mechanics in Medicine and Biology, Honolulu, HA, 1998) pp. 303–306.Google Scholar
7. Kuo, C. K. and Ma, P. X. in Ionically crosslinked alginates as three-dimensional templates for tissue engineering, (Transactions of Society for Biomaterials. 22. Providence, RI, 1999) pp. 219.Google Scholar
8. Hannoun, B. J. M. and Stephanopoulos, G., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 28, 829–835 (1986).Google Scholar
9. Martinsen, A., Storre, I., and Skjak-Braek, G., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 39, 186–194 (1992).Google Scholar
10. Li, R. H., Altreuter, D. H., and Gentile, F. T., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 50, 365–373 (1996).Google Scholar
11. Klein, J., Stock, J., and Vorlop, K. D., Eur J Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 18, 86–91 (1983).Google Scholar
12. Gombotz, W. R. and Wee, S. F., Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 31, 267–285, (1998).Google Scholar
13. Itamunoala, G. F., Biotechnology Progress. 3(2), 115–120 (1987).Google Scholar
14. Yamagiwa, K., Kozawa, T., and Ohkawa, A., J. Chem. Eng. Jap. 28(4), 462–467 (1995).Google Scholar
15. Tanaka, H., Matsumura, M., and Veliky, I. A., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 26, 53–58 (1984).Google Scholar
16. Gehrke, S. H., Fisher, J. P., Palasis, M., and Lund, M. E., Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 831, 179–207 (1997).Google Scholar
17. Nakatsuka, S., and Andrady, A. L., J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 44, 17–28 (1992).Google Scholar