Improvement of osteogenesis and antibacterial properties of a bioactive glass/gelatin-based scaffold using zoledronic acid and CM11 peptide

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD Candidate, Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

2 Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

3 Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Research Center for Prevention of Oral and Dental Diseases, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the effects of zoledronic acid (ZA) and antibacterial CM11 peptide on the osteoinduction and antibacterial properties of bioactive glass (BG). The bioactive glass/gelatin (BG/Gel) composite was synthesized using the sol-gel method. The 2-x minimum inhibitory concentration of the peptide and 4.00 mg mL-1 of ZA were added to the BG/Gel during fabrication. The BG/Gel composite morphological and structural characteristics and anti-bacterial activities were analyzed using Fourier transform infra-red spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and disk diffusion test, respectively. The release of the peptide and ZA from BG/Gel was measured using ultra-violet spectroscopy. After 14 days, the effects of the peptide/ ZA-containing BG/Gel (PZ-BG/Gel) on the growth and differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells were evaluated using 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5 diphenyl tetrazolium bromide, calcium and alkaline phosphatase assays, immunocytochemical staining for osteocalcin (OCN) and real-time polymerase chain reaction for OCN, type I collagen, bone morphogenetic protein 2 and Runt-related transcription factor-2 genes. The disk diffusion test showed the anti-microbial activity of the scaffold against multi-drug-resistant isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Analyses showed a significantly higher level of stem cells differentiation into the osteo-genic cells in PZ-BG/Gel scaffold compared to BG/Gel scaffold alone. Accordingly, osteoblast markers were significantly increased in comparison with the control. In conclusion, the osteo-induction and antibacterial properties of BG-based scaffold can be improved using ZA and CM11.

Keywords

Subjects


  1. Kaewpornsawan K, Eamsobhana P. Free non-vascularized fibular graft for treatment of large bone defect around the elbow in pediatric patients. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2017; 27(7): 895-900.
  2. Oryan A, Alidadi S, Bigham-Sadegh A, et al. Effectiveness of tissue engineered based platelet gel embedded chitosan scaffold on experimentally induced critical sized segmental bone defect model in rat. Injury 2017; 48(7): 1466-1474.
  3. Schmidt AH. Autologous bone graft: is it still the gold standard? Injury 2021; 52(Suppl 2): S18-S22.
  4. Kong CH, Steffi C, Shi Z, et al. Development of mesoporous bioactive glass nanoparticles and its use in bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2018; 106(8): 2878-2887.
  5. Zhang LY, Bi Q, Zhao C, et al. Recent advances in biomaterials for the treatment of bone defects. Organogenesis 2020; 16(4): 113-125.
  6. Vadaye Kheiry E, Fazly Bazzaz BS, Kerachian MA. Implantation of stem cells on synthetic or biological scaffolds: an overview of bone regeneration. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev 2021; 37(2): 238-268.
  7. Fattahi R, Mohebichamkhorami F, Taghipour N, et al. The effect of extracellular matrix remodeling on material-based strategies for bone regeneration: review article. Tissue Cell 2022; 76: 101748. doi: 10.1016/j.tice.2022.101748.
  8. Sow WT, Wang Y, Chen L, et al. Freeze-casted keratin matrix as an organic binder to integrate hydroxy-apatite and BMP2 for enhanced cranial bone regeneration. Adv Healthc Mater 2023; 12(16): e2201886. doi: 10.1002/adhm.202201886.
  9. Firouzian KF, Song Y, Lin F, et al. Fabrication of a biomimetic spinal cord tissue construct with heterogenous mechanical properties using intrascaffold cell assembly. Biotechnol Bioeng 2020; 117(10): 3094-3107.
  10. Faqhiri H, Hannula M, Kellomäki M, et al. Effect of melt-derived bioactive glass particles on the properties of chitosan scaffolds. J Funct Biomater 2019; 10(3): 38. doi: 10.3390/jfb10030038.
  11. Fernandes HR, Gaddam A, Rebelo A, et al. Bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics for healthcare applications in bone regeneration and tissue engineering. Materials (Basel) 2018; 11(12): 2530. doi: 10.3390/ma11122530.
  12. Von Euw S, Ajili W, Chan-Chang TH, et al. Amorphous surface layer versus transient amorphous precursor phase in bone - a case study investigated by solid-state NMR spectroscopy. Acta Biomater 2017; 59: 351-360.
  13. Abodunrin OD, El Mabrouk K, Bricha M. A review on borate bioactive glasses (BBG): effect of doping elements, degradation, and applications. J Mater Chem B 2023; 11(5): 955-973.
  14. Nommeots-Nomm A, Labbaf S, Devlin A, et al. Highly degradable porous melt-derived bioactive glass foam scaffolds for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater 2017; 57: 449-461.
  15. Diomede F, Marconi GD, Fonticoli L, et al. Functional relationship between osteogenesis and angiogenesis in tissue regeneration. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21(9): 3242. doi: 10.3390/ijms21093242.
  16. Chen J, Li Y, Liu S, et al. Freeze-casting osteochondral scaffolds: the presence of a nutrient-permeable film between the bone and cartilage defect reduces cartilage regeneration. Acta Biomater 2022; 154: 168-179.
  17. Park JY, Gao G, Jang J, et al. 3D printed structures for delivery of biomolecules and cells: tissue repair and regeneration. J Mater Chem B 2016; 4: 7521-7539.
  18. Endo Y, Funayama H, Yamaguchi K, et al. Basic studies on the mechanism, prevention, and treatment of osteonecrosis of the jaw induced by bisphosphonates [Japanese]. Yakugaku Zasshi 2020; 140(1): 63-79.
  19. Chen Y, Wu X, Li J, et al. Bone-targeted nanoparticle drug delivery system: an emerging strategy for bone-related disease. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13: 909408. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.909408.
  20. Scala R, Maqoud F, Antonacci M, et al. Bisphosphonates targeting ion channels and musculoskeletal effects. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13: 837534. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.837534.
  21. Florencio-Silva R, Sasso GR, Sasso-Cerri E, et al. Biology of bone tissue: structure, function, and factors that influence bone cells. BioMed Res Int 2015; 2015: 421746. doi: 10.1155/2015/421746.
  22. Hughes R, Chen X, Hunter KD, et al. Bone marrow osteoprogenitors are depleted whereas osteoblasts are expanded independent of the osteogenic vasculature in response to zoledronic acid. FASEB J 2019; 33(11): 12768-12779.
  23. Zhao C, Liu W, Zhu M, et al. Bioceramic-based scaffolds with antibacterial function for bone tissue engineering: a review. Bioact Mater 2022; 18: 383-398.
  24. Cruz J, Ortiz C, Guzmán F, et al. Antimicrobial peptides: promising compounds against pathogenic micro-organisms. Curr Med Chem 2014; 21(20): 2299-2321.
  25. Moghaddam MM, Barjini KA, Ramandi MF, et al. Investigation of the antibacterial activity of a short cationic peptide against multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Salmonella typhimurium strains and its cytotoxicity on eukaryotic cells. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 2014; 30(5):1533-1540.
  26. Hosseini Aghozbeni EA, Imani Fooladi AA, Forotan Koudehi M, et al. Use of nano-bioglass scaffold enhanced with mesenchymal stem cells for rat calvarial bone tissue regeneration. Trends Biomater Artif Organs 2014; 28(1): 8-18.
  27. Amani J, Barjini KA, Moghaddam MM, et al. In vitro synergistic effect of the CM11 antimicrobial peptide in combination with common antibiotics against clinical isolates of six species of multidrug-resistant pathogenic bacteria. Protein Pept Lett 2015; 22(10): 940-951.
  28. Abdulahy SB, Esmaeili Bidhendi M, Vaezi MR, et al. Osteogenesis improvement of gelatin-based nanocomposite scaffold by loading zoledronic acid. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022; 10: 890583. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.890583.
  29. Chizari M, Khosravimelal S, Tebyaniyan H, et al. Fabrication of an antimicrobial peptide-loaded silk fibroin/gelatin bilayer sponge to apply as a wound dressing; an in vitro Int J Pept Res Ther 2022; 28: 18. doi: 10.1007/s10989-021-10333-6.
  30. Askari M, Jadid Tavaf M, Ghorbani M, et al. Electrospun propolis-coated PLGA scaffold enhances the osteoinduction of mesenchymal stem cells. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther 2024; 19(1): 94-102.
  31. Sun J, Li J, Li C, et al. Role of bone morphogenetic protein-2 in osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Mol Med Rep 2015; 12(3): 4230-4237.
  32. Mirzaei A, Saburi E, Enderami SE, et al. Synergistic effects of polyaniline and pulsed electromagnetic field to stem cells osteogenic differentiation on poly-vinylidene fluoride scaffold. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol 2019; 47(1): 3058-3066.
  33. Lee JS, Choi YS, Cho SW. Decellularized tissue matrix for stem cell and tissue engineering. Adv Exp Med Biol 2018; 1064: 161-180.
  34. Rubessa M, Polkoff K, Bionaz M, et al. Use of pig as a model for mesenchymal stem cell therapies for bone regeneration. Anim Biotechnol 2017; 28(4): 275-287.
  35. Chen P, Liu L, Pan J, et al. Biomimetic composite scaffold of hydroxyapatite/gelatin-chitosan core-shell nanofibers for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 2019; 97: 325-335.
  36. Carvalho MS, Silva JC, Udangawa RN, et al. Co-culture cell-derived extracellular matrix loaded electrospun microfibrous scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 2019; 99: 479-490.
  37. Ye Q, Zhang Y, Dai K, et al. Three dimensional printed bioglass/gelatin/alginate composite scaffolds with promoted mechanical strength, biomineralization, cell responses and osteogenesis. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2020; 31(9): 77. doi: 10.1007/s10856-020-06413-6.
  38. Li X, Zuo S, Wang B, et al. Antimicrobial mechanisms and clinical application prospects of antimicrobial peptides. Molecules 2022; 27(9): 2675. doi: 10.3390/molecules27092675.
  39. Mirnejad R, Fasihi-Ramandi M, Behmard E, et al. Interaction of antibacterial CM11 peptide with the Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial membrane models: a molecular dynamics simulations study. Chem Pap 2023; 77(7): 3727-3735.
  40. Rončević T, Vukičević D, Krce L, et al. Selection and redesign for high selectivity of membrane-active antimicrobial peptides from a dedicated sequence/function database. Biochim Biophys Acta Biomembr 2019; 1861(4): 827-834.
  41. Khalili S, Mohebali M, Ebrahimzadeh E, et al. Antimicrobial activity of an antimicrobial peptide against amastigote forms of Leishmania major. Vet Res Forum 2018; 9(4): 323-328.
  42. Wang H, Peng T, Wu H, et al. In situ biomimetic lyotropic liquid crystal gel for full-thickness cartilage defect regeneration. J Control Release 2021; 338: 623-632.
  43. Safari B, Aghazadeh M, Aghanejad A. Osteogenic differentiation of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in a bisphosphonate-functionalized polycaprolactone/gelatin scaffold. Int J Biol Macromol 2023; 241: 124573. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.124573.
  44. Yeniyol S, Ricci JL. Alkaline phosphatase levels of murine pre-osteoblastic cells on anodized and annealed titanium surfaces. Eur Oral Res 2018; 52(1):12-19.
  45. Bensimon-Brito A, Cardeira J, Dionísio G, et al. Revisiting in vivo staining with alizarin red S - a valuable approach to analyse zebrafish skeletal mineralization during development and regeneration. BMC Dev Biol 2016; 16: 2. doi: 10.1186/s12861-016-0102-4.
  46. Kannan S, Ghosh J, Dhara SK. Osteogenic differentiation potential of porcine bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell subpopulations selected in different basal media. Biol Open 2020; 9(10): bio053280. doi: 10.1242/bio.053280.
Volume 15, Issue 9
September 2024
Pages 487-498

  • Receive Date 13 January 2024
  • Revise Date 19 February 2024
  • Accept Date 07 April 2024