Effects of diameters and spacing of silicon micro pillars on the differentiation of neural stem cells

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.52.013

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Different structures of matrix models, such as grating, holes and pillars make different effects on the differentiation of neural stem cells.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the effects of the diameter and spacing, known as physical signals of micro pillars on neural stem cell differentiation.
METHODS: Micro pillars with different diameters and spacing, both of which had four dimensions of 2.5, 5, 10 and 20 μm, were fabricated on silicon substrates by photolithographic method. Purified primary neural stem cells were incubated on the each micro pillar for 7 days in vitro. Then the differentiation of neural stem cells into neuron-like cells was observed using immunofluorescence staining and quantitative real-time PCR.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: When the diameters of the micro pillars were constant and the spacing of micro pillars varied in the range of 2.5-10 μm, the differentiation rate of neural stem cells increased with the spacing increase. When the spacing was invariable and the diameters changed in the range of 2.5-20 μm, the differentiation rate of neural stem cells declined with the diameter increase. Especially, the micro pillars with 2.5 μm diameter and 10 μm spacing significantly promoted the differentiation of neural stem cells into neuron-like cells. These results show that specific micro pillars with small diameters and large spacing facilitate the differentiation of neural stem cells, thus providing guidance for developing tissue-engineered scaffolds.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

Key words: Extracellular Matrix, Neural Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Yan Dong-dong, Gao Xing-hua, Xiong Yi.

Effects of diameters and spacing of silicon micro pillars on the differentiation of neural stem cells

[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2016, 20(52): 7844-7850.

Figures/Tables 5

References

[1]Pang ZP,Yang N,Vierbuchen T,et al.Induction of human neuronal cells by defined transcription factors. Nature.2011;476(7359):220-223.

[2]Pfisterer U,Kirkeby A,Torper O,et al.Direct conversion of human fibroblasts to dopaminergic neurons.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(25):10343-10348.

[3]Masip M,Veiga A,Izpisúa Belmonte JC,et al. Reprogramming with defined factors: from induced pluripotency to induced transdifferentiation.Mol Hum Reprod.2010;16(11): 856-868.

[4]Campbell CE, von Recum AF.Microtopography and soft tissue response. J Invest Surg.1989;2(1): 51-74.

[5]Mata A,Boehm C,Fleischman AJ,et al.Growth of connective tissue progenitor cells on microtextured polydimethylsiloxane surfaces.J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;62(4):499-506.

[6]Wan Y,Wang Y,Liu Z,et al.Adhesion and proliferation of OCT-1 osteoblast-like cells on micro- and nano-scale topography structured poly(L-lactide).Biomaterials. 2005;26(21):4453-4459.

[7]Charest JL,García AJ,King WP.Myoblast alignment and differentiation on cell culture substrates with microscale topography and model chemistries. Biomaterials.2007; 28(13):2202-2210.

[8]Uttayarat P,Chen M,Li M,et al.Microtopography and flow modulate the direction of endothelial cell migration.Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol.2008; 294(2):H1027-1035 .

[9]Bettinger CJ, Langer R, Borenstein JT. Engineering substrate topography at the micro‐and nanoscale to control cell function.Angew Chem Int Ed Engl.2009; 48(30):5406-5415.

[10]Ghibaudo M,Trichet L,Le Digabel J,et al.Substrate topography induces a crossover from 2D to 3D behavior in fibroblast migration.Biophys J.2009; 97(1):357-368.

[11]Kolind K,Dolatshahi-Pirouz A,Lovmand J,et al.A combinatorial screening of human fibroblast responses on micro-structured surfaces.Biomaterials.2010;31(35): 9182-9191.

[12]Yim EK,Pang SW,Leong KW.Synthetic nanostructures inducing differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells into neuronal lineage.Exp Cell Res. 2007;313(9): 1820-1829.

[13]Engler AJ,Sen S,Sweeney HL,et al. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell. 2006;126 (4):677-689.

[14]Nikkhah M,Edalat F,Manoucheri S,et al.Engineering microscale topographies to control the cell-substrate interface.Biomaterials.2012;33(21):5230-5246.

[15]Ankam S,Suryana M,Chan LY,et al.Substrate topography and size determine the fate of human embryonic stem cells to neuronal or glial lineage.Acta Biomaterialia.2013;9(1):4535-4545.

[16]Chew SY,Low WC.Scaffold‐based approach to direct stem cell neural and cardiovascular differentiation: An analysis of physical and biochemical effects. J Biomed Mater Res A.2011;97(3):355-374.

[17]Yang Y,Leong KW.Nanoscale surfacing for regenerative medicine.Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol.2010;2(5):478-495.

[18]Moe AA,Suryana M,Marcy G,et al.Microarray with micro- and nano-topographies enables identification of the optimal topography for directing the differentiation of primary murine neural progenitor cells.Small.2012; 8(19):3050-3061.

[19]Lee MR, Kwon KW, Jung Het al.Direct differentiation of human embryonic stem cells into selective neurons on nanoscale ridge/groove pattern arrays. Biomaterials. 2010;31(15):4360-4366.

[20]Xiong Y, Zeng YS, Zeng CG, et al.Synaptic transmission of neural stem cells seeded in 3-dimensional PLGA scaffolds.Biomaterials.2009；30(22):3711-3722.

[21]Gao X, Chau YY, Xie J,et al.Regulating cell behaviors on micropillar topographies affected by interfacial energy.RSC Adv.2015;5(29):22916-22922.

[22]Li X,Katsanevakis E,Liu X,et al.Engineering neural stem cell fates with hydrogel design for central nervous system regeneration.Prog Polym Sci. 2012;37(8): 1105-1129.

[23]Chai C, Leong KW.Biomaterials approach to expand and direct differentiation of stem cells.Molecular Therapy. 2007;15(3):467-480.

[24]Christopherson GT, Song H, Mao HQ.The influence of fiber diameter of electrospun substrates on neural stem cell differentiation and proliferation. Biomaterials. 2009;30(4):556-564.