Elsevier

Methods

Volume 171, 15 January 2020, Pages 28-40
Methods

An overview of decellularisation techniques of native tissues and tissue engineered products for bone, ligament and tendon regeneration

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2019.08.002Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Native tissue decellularisation offers an available source of compatible allografts.

  • Decellularisation protocols affect differently the regenerative potential of tissues.

  • Efficacy is based on DNA removal, overlooking the preservation of the matrix.

  • The decoration of synthetic scaffolds by in vitro deposited ECM is promising.

Abstract

Decellularised tissues and organs have been successfully used in a variety of tissue engineering/regenerative medicine applications. Because of the complexity of each tissue (size, porosity, extracellular matrix (ECM) composition etc.), there is no standardised protocol and the decellularisation methods vary widely, thus leading to heterogeneous outcomes. Physical, chemical, and enzymatic methods have been developed and optimised for each specific application and this review describes the most common strategies utilised to achieve decellularisation of soft and hard tissues. While removal of the DNA is the primary goal of decellularisation, it is generally achieved at the expense of ECM preservation due to the harsh chemical or enzymatic processing conditions. As denaturation of the native ECM has been associated with undesired host responses, decellularisation conditions aimed at effectively achieving simultaneous DNA removal and minimal ECM damage will be highlighted. Additionally, the utilisation of decellularised matrices in regenerative medicine is explored, as are the most recent strategies implemented to circumvent challenges in this field. In summary, this review focusses on the latest advancements and future perspectives in the utilisation of natural ECM for the decoration of synthetic porous scaffolds.

Introduction

Traumatic injuries and infective conditions affecting bone, tendons and ligaments are a significant health and economic burden and generally require surgical reconstruction using autologous or allogenic grafting materials. Autologous grafts have the advantages of being histocompatible and non-immunogenic [1] and have a low risk of disease transmission, but their availability is limited and donor site morbidity is a significant issue. While the use of allografts and xenografts eliminates donor site morbidity and decreases operating times, these materials have the potential risk of transmitting diseases, immune rejection and may require extended time periods for regeneration to occur [1].

One of the major concerns with the use of allografts and xenografts is the management of the subsequent immune response. The immunogenicity of xenografts depends largely on the presence of α-gal epitopes, expressed by most species with the notable exceptions of humans and some primates [2]. Another important mechanism, responsible for rejection of both allografts and xenografts is the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). The main function of surface proteins coded by the MHC is to bind foreign antigens, and present them to immune cells in order to initiate an immune response. In graft tissues, MHC coded surface proteins act as antigens, which initiates an immune response by the host [3]. However, extracellular matrix (ECM) components, probably because of their crucial roles in cell migration, proliferation, and differentiation [4], [5], are highly conserved across species and do not seem to trigger a major destructive inflammatory reaction [6]. Hence, the removal of cellular and MHC components i.e. ‘decellularisation’ of allograft and xenograft material has therefore emerged as a promising tool for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications, both preclinically and clinically. Decellularisation allows the preservation of naturally occurring biological components while significantly reducing the immunogenicity of grafts, providing a physical and possibly a biochemical niche for the homing of progenitor cells enabling subsequent tissue regeneration [7], [8]. Biological scaffolds composed of decellularised extracellular matrix (dECM) have been utilised in the repair of various tissues, including skin [9], bladder [10], [11] and heart valve [12], [13]. Several decellularised tissues have received FDA approval for clinical use in humans, including porcine heart valves (Synergraft®; Cryolife), dermis tissue (Alloderm®; LifeCell) and porcine urinary bladder (Urinary bladder matrix; ACell) [14], [15] and are commercially available.

The preparation of acellular matrices requires the thorough removal of cellular components while preserving the native ultrastructure and composition of the ECM during the process of tissue decellularisation [8], [16].

Bone is a hard tissue, composed of mineralised inorganic phase inserted in an organic phase, mainly collagen I, and some non-collagenous proteins such as osteocalcin, bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), proteoglycans [17]. Ligaments and tendons are soft tissues, which connect bone to bone and bone to muscle respectively. Collagen is the major protein in both tendons and ligaments, accounting for approximately 75% of the dry weight [18]. Other ECM components include non-collagenous matrix such as proteoglycans, composed of glycosaminoglycan chains (GAG) and proteins, which play an important structural role [18]. Indeed, GAGs are a major component of the soluble protein fraction of the ECM and are directly associated with mechanical loading capacity in a variety of tissues [19]. Entheses are the interfaces where tendon or ligament inserts into bone, allowing transmission of forces between two mechanically dissimilar tissues, hence avoiding mechanical mismatch [20]. They are highly hierarchical tissues, which exhibit gradients in tissue organisation with varying cellular and extracellular matrix compositions and arrangements [21].

Due to the unique characteristics of each tissue, (such as anatomical structure, dimensions, porosity, thickness, presence of soft tissue, etc.), a wide range of different decellularisation methods have been proposed encompassing a great variety of detergents, concentrations and incubation times [22], [23], [24] with the primary objective of achieving appropriate removal of the cellular components, while the preservation of the ECM being a secondary consideration.

There is a plethora of documented decellularisation techniques, many of which are tissue specific, and the establishment of a standardised protocol remains elusive if not impossible. As such, multiphasic tissues including bone-ligament grafts are even more challenging due to different tissue morphologies and architectures [20]. This review therefore provides an overview of the main decellularisation techniques for bone and ligament tissues, and their potential for application in regenerative medicine and tissue engineering. The second part of the review elaborates on the current limitations of decellularised matrices and how recent developments involving in vitro recellularisation prior to implantation can potentially enhance their regenerative potential. Ultimately, the recent concept of synthetic scaffold decoration by natural ECM protein is described and its in vitro and in vivo efficacy towards tissue regeneration is critically examined.

Section snippets

Decellularisation of native tissues: ligaments, tendons and bone

Decellularised matrices can be considered as biological scaffolds derived from native tissues, treated to remove the cellular components while preserving structural characteristics and functional ECM proteins [16]. Decellularisation is generally achieved by a combination of chemical, enzymatic and/or physical treatment. As stated above, the tissue structural properties determine the decellularisation protocol and a non-exhaustive list of protocols utilised for tendon/ligament and bone tissues

Decellularisation of native ECM for the formation of hydrogels

The use of hydrogels allows a localised delivery with minimal invasive surgical intervention.

In order to extract ECM protein from natural tissues, a decellularisation step is necessary in order to prevent immune reaction once implanted. This applies for natural ECM based hydrogel and scaffolds cultured in vitro prior to removing the cellular components leading to ECM decoration.

The native tissues are decellularised via one of the methods described in the previous section, and then further

Biologically enhanced synthetic scaffolds

Because of their complex structure and the essential mechanical properties of ligaments and tendons, decellularisation of whole tissue is the most suitable scaffold for ligament/tendon replacement, at least from a biomechanical aspect. In contrast, bone defects often require anatomically accurate grafts which may not be obtained by using native decellularised tissues. Therefore, the technology of 3D-printing enables the development of such personalised structures, although such scaffolds

Future directions

This review outlines the main decellularisation techniques for native tissues using either chemical, enzymatic or physical treatments for the removal of the cellular components and has highlighted their limitations. Although the utilisation of decellularised matrices for tissue regeneration is widespread, there is still limited knowledge on the extent of remaining cellular component that could trigger an immune rejection. Indeed, the characterisation of decellularised tissues is almost

Acknowledgments

This study has been financially supported by the Australian National Health Medical Research Council (grant number: APP1086181).

Author disclosure statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References (85)

  • B.L. Foster et al.

    Osteopontin regulates dentin and alveolar bone development and mineralization

    Bone

    (2018)
  • T. Woods et al.

    Effectiveness of three extraction techniques in the development of a decellularized bone-anterior cruciate ligament-bone graft

    Biomaterials

    (2005)
  • I. Marcos-Campos et al.

    Bone scaffold architecture modulates the development of mineralized bone matrix by human embryonic stem cells

    Biomaterials

    (2012)
  • S. Wang et al.

    Decellularized tendon as a prospective scaffold for tendon repair

    Mater. Sci. Eng. C

    (2017)
  • C. Gungormus et al.

    Histopathological and biomechanical evaluation of tenocyte seeded allografts on rat Achilles tendon regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (2015)
  • P.W. Whitlock et al.

    A naturally derived, cytocompatible, and architecturally optimized scaffold for tendon and ligament regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (2007)
  • Y. Hashimoto et al.

    The effect of decellularized bone/bone marrow produced by high-hydrostatic pressurization on the osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells

    Biomaterials

    (2011)
  • L.J. Ning et al.

    The utilization of decellularized tendon slices to provide an inductive microenvironment for the proliferation and tenogenic differentiation of stem cells

    Biomaterials

    (2015)
  • S. Funamoto et al.

    The use of high-hydrostatic pressure treatment to decellularize blood vessels

    Biomaterials

    (2010)
  • D.A. Taylor et al.

    Decellularized matrices in regenerative medicine

    Acta Biomater.

    (2018)
  • C.W. Cheng et al.

    Decellularized tissue and cell-derived extracellular matrices as scaffolds for orthopaedic tissue engineering

    Biotechnol. Adv.

    (2014)
  • W.Q. Sun et al.

    Calorimetric study of extracellular tissue matrix degradation and instability after gamma irradiation

    Acta Biomater.

    (2008)
  • H. Liu et al.

    Biomimetic tendon extracellular matrix composite gradient scaffold enhances ligament-to-bone junction reconstruction

    Acta Biomater.

    (2017)
  • M.T. Spang et al.

    Extracellular matrix hydrogel therapies: in vivo applications and development

    Acta Biomater.

    (2018)
  • D.O. Freytes et al.

    Preparation and rheological characterization of a gel form of the porcine urinary bladder matrix

    Biomaterials

    (2008)
  • W. Wang

    Lyophilization and development of solid protein pharmaceuticals

    Int. J. Pharm.

    (2000)
  • M.J. Sawkins et al.

    Hydrogels derived from demineralized and decellularized bone extracellular matrix

    Acta Biomater.

    (2013)
  • N. Datta et al.

    Effect of bone extracellular matrix synthesized in vitro on the osteoblastic differentiation of marrow stromal cells

    Biomaterials

    (2005)
  • C. Vaquette et al.

    Effect of culture conditions and calcium phosphate coating on ectopic bone formation

    Biomaterials

    (2013)
  • A.M. Wojtowicz et al.

    Coating of biomaterial scaffolds with the collagen-mimetic peptide GFOGER for bone defect repair

    Biomaterials

    (2010)
  • A.M. Moursi et al.

    Enhanced osteoblast response to a polymethylmethacrylate–hydroxyapatite composite

    Biomaterials

    (2002)
  • P.T. Sudheesh Kumar et al.

    Additively manufactured biphasic construct loaded with BMP-2 for vertical bone regeneration: a pilot study in rabbit

    Mater. Sci. Eng. C

    (2018)
  • D.M. Faulk et al.

    ECM hydrogel coating mitigates the chronic inflammatory response to polypropylene mesh

    Biomaterials

    (2014)
  • F. Pati et al.

    Ornamenting 3D printed scaffolds with cell-laid extracellular matrix for bone tissue regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (2015)
  • D.K.C. Cooper et al.

    Identification of α-galactosyl and other carbohydrate epitopes that are bound by human anti-pig antibodies: relevance to discordant xenografting in man

    Transpl. Immunol.

    (1993)
  • T.M. Seyler et al.

    The development of a xenograft-derived scaffold for tendon and ligament reconstruction using a decellularization and oxidation protocol

    Arthroscopy

    (2017)
  • R. Yoshida et al.

    Decellularization of bovine anterior cruciate ligament tissues minimizes immunogenic reactions to alpha-gal epitopes by human peripheral blood mononuclear cells

    Knee

    (2012)
  • M.L. Wong et al.

    Immunogenicity in xenogeneic scaffold generation: antigen removal vs. decellularization

    Acta Biomater.

    (2014)
  • L.J. White et al.

    The impact of sterilization upon extracellular matrix hydrogel structure and function

    J. Immunol. Regen. Med.

    (2018)
  • A. Gazdag et al.

    Alternatives to autogenous bone graft: efficacy and indications

    J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg.

    (1995)
  • S.F. Badylak et al.

    Immune Response to Biologic Scaffold Materials

    (2008)
  • S. Werner et al.

    Regulation of wound healing by growth factors and cytokines

    Physiol. Rev.

    (2017)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text