Introduction: Biodegradable polyester scaffolds have proven useful for growing neointestinal tissue equivalents both in vitro and in vivo. These scaffolds allow cells to attach and grow in a 3-dimensional space while nutrient flow is maintained throughout the matrix. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different biopolymer constructs and to determine mucosal engraftment rates and mucosal morphology. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that different biopolymer constructs may vary in their ability to provide a good scaffolding onto which intestinal stem cell organoids may be engrafted. Study Design: Eight different microporous biodegradable polymer tubes composed of polyglycolic acid (PGA), polylactic acid, or a combination of both, using different fabrication techniques were seeded with intestinal stem cell clusters obtained from neonatal rats. Three different seeded polymer constructs were subsequently placed into the omentum of syngeneic adult recipient rats (n = 8). Neointestinal grafts were harvested 4 weeks after implantation. Polymers were microscopically evaluated for the presence of mucosal growth, morphology, scar formation and residual polymer. Results: Mucosal engraftment was observed in 7 out of 8 of the polymer constructs. A maximal surface area engraftment of 36% (range 5–36%) was seen on nonwoven, randomly entangled, small fiber PGA mesh coated with aerosolized 5% poly-L-lactic acid. Villous and crypt development, morphology and created surface area were best on PGA nonwoven mesh constructs treated with poly-L-lactic acid. Electrospun microfiber PGA had poor overall engraftment with little or no crypt or villous formation. Conclusion: Intestinal organoids can be engrafted onto biodegradable polyester scaffoldings with restitution of an intestinal mucosal layer. Variability in polymer composition, processing techniques and material properties (fiber size, luminal dimensions and pore size) affect engraftment success. Future material refinements should lead to improvements in the development of a tissue-engineered intestine.

Keywords:
Intestinal stem cell, Polyglycolic acid, Polylactic acid, Tissue-engineered small intestine, Polyester scaffolds
1.
Avansino, J.R., D.C. Chen, et al. (2005) Treatment of bile acid malabsorption using ileal stem cell transplantation. J Am Coll Surg 201: 710–720.
2.
Beckstead, B.L., S. Pan, et al. (2005) Esophageal epithelial cell interaction with synthetic and natural scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 26: 6217–6228.
3.
Bezuidenhout, D., N. Davies, P. Zilla (2002) Effect of well defined dodecahedral porosity on inflammation and angiogenesis. ASAIO J 48: 465–471.
4.
Boland, E.D., T.A. Telemeco, et al. (2004) Utilizing acid pretreatment and electrospinning to improve biocompatibility of poly(glycolic acid) for tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 71: 144–152.
5.
Booth, C., C.S. Potten (2000) Gut instincts: thoughts on intestinal epithelial stem cells. J Clin Invest 105: 1493–1499.
6.
Brauker, J.H., V.E. Carr-Brendel, et al. (1995) Neovascularization of synthetic membranes directed by membrane microarchitecture. J Biomed Mater Res 29: 1517–1524.
7.
Byrne, T.A., D.J. Nompleggi, et al. (1996) Advances in the management of patients with intestinal failure. Transplant Proc 28: 2683–2690.
8.
Choi, R.S., J.P. Vacanti (1997) Preliminary studies of tissue-engineered intestine using isolated epithelial organoid units on tubular synthetic biodegradable scaffolds. Transplant Proc 29: 848–851.
9.
Evans, G.S., N. Flint, et al. (1992) The development of a method for the preparation of rat intestinal epithelial cell primary cultures. J Cell Sci 101: 219–231.
10.
Gazet, J.C., J. Kopp (1964) The surgical significance of the ileocecal junction. Surgery 56: 565–573.
11.
Goulet, O., F. Sauvat (2006) Short bowel syndrome and intestinal transplantation in children. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 9: 304–313.
12.
Grant, D., K. Abu-Elmagd, et al. (2005) 2003 report of the intestine transplant registry: a new era has dawned. Ann Surg 241: 607–613.
13.
Grikscheit, T.C., A. Siddique, et al. (2004) Tissue-engineered small intestine improves recovery after massive small bowel resection. Ann Surg 240: 748–754.
14.
Grosfeld, J.L., F.J. Rescorla, et al. (1986) Short bowel syndrome in infancy and childhood. Analysis of survival in 60 patients. Am J Surg 151: 41–46.
15.
Kim, S.S., S. Kaihara, et al. (1999a) Regenerative signals for intestinal epithelial organoid units transplanted on biodegradable polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering of small intestine. Transplantation 67: 227–233.
16.
Kim, S.S., S. Kaihara, et al. (1999b) Effects of anastomosis of tissue-engineered neointestine to native small bowel. J Surg Res 87: 6–13.
17.
Kim, G., W. Kim (2006) Highly porous 3D nanofiber scaffold using an electrospinning technique. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, Epub ahead of print.
18.
Kisielinski, K., S. Willis, et al. (2002) A simple new method to calculate small intestine absorptive surface in the rat. Clin Exp Med 2: 131–135.
19.
Liu, X., Y. Won, et al. (2006) Porogen-induced surface modification of nano-fibrous poly(L-lactic acid) scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 27: 3980–3987.
20.
Mooney, D.J., C.L. Mazzoni, et al. (1996) Stabilized polyglycolic acid fibre-based tubes for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 17: 115–124.
21.
Potten, C.S., M. Loeffler (1990) Stem cells: attributes, cycles, spirals, pitfalls and uncertainties. Lessons for and from the crypt. Development 110: 1001–1020.
22.
Rizvi, A.Z., J.R. Swain, et al. (2006) Bone marrow-derived cells fuse with normal and transformed intestinal stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103: 6321–6325.
23.
Rosengren, A., L.M. Bjursten (2003) Pore size in implanted polypropylene filters is critical for tissue organization. J Biomed Mater Res A 67: 918–926.
24.
Sattar, A., S.C. Robson, et al. (1999) Expression of growth regulatory genes in a SCID mouse-human model of intestinal epithelial regeneration. J Pathol 187: 229–236.
25.
Sauvat, F., L. Dupic, et al. (2006) Factors influencing outcome after intestinal transplantation in children. Transplant Proc 38: 1689–1691.
26.
Slorach, E.M., F.C. Campbell, et al. (1999) A mouse model of intestinal stem cell function and regeneration. J Cell Sci 112: 3029–3038.
27.
Sosnowski, S., P. Wozniak, et al. (2006) Polyester scaffolds with bimodal pore size distribution for tissue engineering. Macromol Biosci 6: 425–434.
28.
Tait, I.S., N. Flint, et al. (1994) Generation of neomucosa in vivo by transplantation of dissociated rat postnatal small intestinal epithelium. Differentiation 56: 91–100.
29.
Thompson, J.S. (1993) Surgical management of short bowel syndrome. Surgery 113: 4–7.
30.
Thompson, J.S. (1994) Management of the short bowel syndrome. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 23: 403–420.
31.
Zaman, M.H., L.M. Trapani, et al. (2006) Migration of tumor cells in 3D matrices is governed by matrix stiffness along with cell-matrix adhesion and proteolysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103: 10889–10894.
32.
Zeltinger, J., J.K. Sherwood, et al. (2001) Effect of pore size and void fraction on cellular adhesion, proliferation, and matrix deposition. Tissue Eng 7: 557–572.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
2007
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.