J.M. Jukes

Endochondral bone tissue engineering using embryonic stem cells

Embryonic stem cells can provide an unlimited supply of pluripotent cells for tissue engineering applications. Bone tissue engineering by directly differentiating ES cells (ESCs) into osteoblasts has been unsuccessful so far. Therefore, we investigated an alternative approach, based on the process of endochondral ossification. A cartilage matrix was formed in vitro by mouse ESCs seeded on a scaffold. When these cartilage tissue-engineered constructs (CTECs) were implanted s.c., the cartilage matured, became hypertrophic, calcified, and was ultimately replaced by bone tissue in the course of 21 days. Bone aligning hypertrophic cartilage was observed frequently. Using various chondrogenic differentiation periods in vitro, we demonstrated that a cartilage matrix is required for bone formation by ESCs. Chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells and articular chondrocytes showed that a cartilage matrix alone was not sufficient to drive endochondral bone formation. Moreover, when CTECs were implanted orthotopically into critical-size cranial defects in rats, efficient bone formation was observed. We report previously undescribed ESC-based bone tissue engineering under controlled reproducible conditions. Furthermore, our data indicate that ESCs can also be used as a model system to study endochondral bone formation.

Critical Steps toward a tissue-engineered cartilage implant using embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are a potential source for cartilage tissue engineering because they provide an unlimited supply of cells that can be differentiated into chondrocytes. So far, chondrogenic differentiation of both mouse and human ES cells has only been demonstrated in two-dimensional cultures, in pellet cultures, in a hydrogel, or on thin biomaterials. The next challenge will be to form cartilage on a load-bearing, clinically relevant-sized scaffold in vitro and in vivo, to regenerate defects in patients suffering from articular cartilage disorders. For a successful implant, cells have to be seeded efficiently and homogenously throughout the scaffold. Parameters investigated were the scaffold architecture, seeding method, and cellular condition. Seeding in a three-dimensional fiber-deposited (3DF) scaffold was more homogenous than in a compression-molded scaffold. The seeding efficiency on bare scaffolds was compromised by the absence of serum in the chondrogenic medium, but could be improved by combining the cells with a gel and subsequent injection into the 3DF scaffolds. However, the viability of the cells was unsatisfactory in the interior of the graft. Cell aggregates, the so-called embryoid bodies (EBs), were seeded with increased survival rate. Mouse ES cells readily underwent chondrogenic differentiation in vitro in pellets, on bare scaffolds, in Matrigel, and in agarose, both as single cells and in EBs. The differentiation protocol requires further improvement to achieve homogenous differentiation and abolish teratoma formation in vivo. We conclude that ES cells can be used as a cell source for cartilage tissue engineering, pending further optimization of the strategy.

Skeletal tissue engineering using embryonic stem cells

Various cell types have been investigated as candidate cell sources for cartilage and bone tissue engineering. In this review, we focused on chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation of mouse and human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and their potential in cartilage and bone tissue engineering. A decade ago, mouse ESCs were first used as a model to study cartilage and bone development and essential genes, factors and conditions for chondrogenesis and osteogenesis were unravelled. This knowledge, combined with data from the differentiation of adult stem cells, led to successful chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation of mouse ESCs and later also human ESCs. Next, researchers focused on the use of ESCs for skeletal tissue engineering. Cartilage and bone tissue was formed in vivo using ESCs. However, the amount, homogeneity and stability of the cartilage and bone formed were still insufficient for clinical application. The current protocols require improvement not only in differentiation efficiency but also in ESC‐specific hurdles, such as tumourigenicity and immunorejection. In addition, some of the general tissue engineering challenges, such as cell seeding and nutrient limitation in larger constructs, will also apply for ESCs. In conclusion, there are still many challenges, but there is potential for ESCs in skeletal tissue engineering. Copyright

Differential bone-forming capacity of osteogenic cells from either embryonic stem cells or bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells

For more than a decade, human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) have been used in bone tissue‐engineering research. More recently some of the focus in this field has shifted towards the use of embryonic stem cells. While it is well known that hMSCs are able to form bone when implanted subcutaneously in immune‐deficient mice, the osteogenic potential of embryonic stem cells has been mainly assessed in vitro. Therefore, we performed a series of studies to compare the in vitro and in vivo osteogenic capacities of human and mouse embryonic stem cells to those of hMSCs. Embryonic and mesenchymal stem cells showed all characteristic signs of osteogenic differentiation in vitro when cultured in osteogenic medium, including the deposition of a mineralized matrix and expression of genes involved in osteogenic differentiation. As such, based on the in vitro results, osteogenic ES cells could not be discriminated from osteogenic hMSCs. Nevertheless, although osteogenic hMSCs formed bone upon implantation, osteogenic cells derived from both human and mouse embryonic stem cells did not form functional bone, indicated by absence of osteocytes, bone marrow and lamellar bone. Although embryonic stem cells show all signs of osteogenic differentiation in vitro, it appears that, in contrast to mesenchymal stem cells, they do not possess the ability to form bone in vivo when a similar culture method and osteogenic differentiation protocol was applied. Copyright

Chapter 1 – Stem cells

Publisher Summary This chapter defines stem cells and their properties. It identifies the major differences between embryonic and adult stem cells. Stem cells can be defined by two properties: the ability to make identical copies of themselves and the ability to form other cell types of the body. These properties are also referred to as “stemness.” Stem cells may potentially provide an unlimited supply of cells that can form any of the hundreds of specialized cells in the body. It is because of these properties that stem cells are an interesting cell source for tissue engineers. Stem cells can be divided into two main groups: embryonic and adult or somatic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are responsible for embryonic and fetal development and growth. In the human body, adult stem cells are responsible for growth, tissue maintenance and regeneration and repair of diseased or damaged tissue. Embryonic stem cells do not exist in the body. When cells are isolated from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, they can be massively expanded in the laboratory, while maintaining their pluripotency. Adult stem cells are undifferentiated cells, which reside in differentiated tissues.