Evaluación de la biocompatibilidad, citotoxicidad y actividad antibacteriana de nuevos andamios óseos bioimpresos en 3D a base de quitosano: estudio in vitro
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15517/n6y6a095Palabras clave:
Bioimpresión tridimensional; Ingeniería de tejidos; Regeneración ósea; Colágeno; Quitosano; Hidroxiapatita; Salud.Resumen
El objetivo del estudio fue la caracterización biológica de nuevos andamios óseos tridimensionales (3D) bioimpresos, desarrollados para ingeniería de tejidos óseos, mediante análisis de biocompatibilidad, citotoxicidad y ensayo antibacteriano. Se formuló una biotinta compuesta por polietilenglicol (PEG), diacrilato de polietilenglicol (PEGDA), hidroxiapatita (HAP), colágeno (COL) y quitosano (CH), la cual fue bioimpresa en 3D para obtener andamios óseos utilizando una bioimpresora 3D de extrusión Cellink Bio X. La caracterización biológica in vitro incluyó el ensayo de 3-(4,5-dimetiltiazol-2-il)-2,5-difeniltetrazolio bromuro (MTT) para evaluar la biocompatibilidad utilizando células osteoblásticas tipo MG-63, el análisis de citotoxicidad mediante un modelo de pez cebra, con el Grupo A (andamios bioimpresos en 3D) y el Grupo B (solución salina tamponada con fosfatos). El ensayo antibacteriano se realizó mediante el método de difusión en disco, con el Grupo A1 (baja concentración de andamios bioimpresos en 3D), el Grupo A2 (alta concentración de andamios bioimpresos en 3D), el Grupo B (dimetilsulfóxido) y el Grupo C (20 mg de eritromicina y 20 mg de penicilina), frente a S. aureus, S. mutans, E. faecalis y K. pneumoniae . La caracterización biológica reveló una buena biocompatibilidad del Grupo A (andamios bioimpresos en 3D), comparable al Grupo B (MG-63 no tratadas), en todos los tiempos evaluados. No se observaron diferencias significativas en la viabilidad embrionaria entre los Grupos A y B, evidenciándose una adecuada longitud, un tronco prominente, cola bien definida y desarrollo adecuado de órganos. El ensayo antibacteriano mostró una actividad intergrupal significativa frente a todas las cepas evaluadas (p=0.000), con zonas de inhibición del Grupo A2 comparables a las del grupo control frente a S. aureus y S. mutans. La caracterización biológica de los nuevos andamios óseos bioimpresos en 3D demostró una buena biocompatibilidad, citotoxicidad limitada y propiedades antibacterianas prometedoras.
Descargas
Referencias
Bishop E.S., Mostafa S., Pakvasa M., Luu H.H., Lee M.J., Wolf J.M., et al. 3-D bioprinting technologies in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: Current and future trends. Genes Dis. 2017; 4 (4): 185-195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gendis.2017.10.002
Arumugam P., Kaarthikeyan G., Eswaramoorthy R. Three-Dimensional Bioprinting: The Ultimate Pinnacle of Tissue Engineering. Cureus. 2024; 16 (4): e58029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.58029
Ramesh S., Harrysson O., Rao P., Tamayol A., Cormier D., Zhang Y., et al. Extrusion bioprinting: Recent progress, challenges, and future opportunities. Bioprinting. 2021; 21: e00116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00116
Chen X.B., Anvari-Yazdi F., Duan X., Zimmerling A., Gharraei R., Sharma N.K., et al. Biomaterials / bioinks and extrusion bioprinting. Bioact Mater. 2023; 28: 511-536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.06.006
Gungor-Ozkerim P.S., Inci I., Zhang Y.S., Khademhosseini A., Dokmeci M.R. Bioinks for 3D bioprinting: an overview. Biomater Sci. 2018; 6 (5): 915-946. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C7BM00765E
Krishna D.V., Sankar M.R. Persuasive factors on the bioink printability and cell viability in the extrusion-based 3D bioprinting for tissue regeneration applications. Engineered Regeneration. 2023; 4: 396-410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engreg.2023.07.002
Reddy M.S.B., Ponnamma D., Choudhary R., Sadasivuni K.K. A Comparative Review of Natural and Synthetic Biopolymer Composite Scaffolds. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13 (7): 1105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13071105
Zhang J., Wehrle E., Rubert M., Müller R. 3D Bioprinting of Human Tissues: Biofabrication, Bioinks, and Bioreactors. Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22 (8): 3971. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22083971
Salehi S., Ghomi H., Hassanzadeh-Tabrizi S.A., Koupaei N., Khodaei M. The effect of polyethylene glycol on printability, physical and mechanical properties and osteogenic potential of 3D-printed poly (l-lactic acid)/polyethylene glycol scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022; 221: 1325-1334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.09.027
Yousefiasl S., Sharifi E., Salahinejad E., Makvandi P., Irani S. Bioactive 3D-printed chitosan-based scaffolds for personalized craniofacial bone tissue engineering. Engineered Regeneration. 2023; 4: 1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engreg.2022.09.005
Guo C., Wu J., Zeng Y., Li H. Construction of 3D bioprinting of HAP/collagen scaffold in gelation bath for bone tissue engineering. Regen Biomater. 2023; 10: rbad067. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rb/rbad067
Kontakis M.G., Moulin M., Andersson B., Norein N., Samanta A., Stelzl C., et al. Trabecular-bone mimicking osteoconductive collagen scaffolds: an optimized 3D printing approach using freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels. 3D Print Med. 2025; 11 (1): 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-025-00255-0
Salehi S., Ghomi H., Hassanzadeh-Tabrizi S.A., Koupaei N., Khodaei M. Antibacterial and osteogenic properties of chitosan-polyethylene glycol nanofibre-coated 3D printed scaffold with vancomycin and insulin-like growth factor-1 release for bone repair. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025; 298: 139883. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.139883
Atay H.Y. Antibacterial Activity of Chitosan-Based Systems. Functional Chitosan. 2020; 457-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0263-7_15
Zhu J. Bioactive modification of poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels for tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2010; 31 (17): 4639-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.02.044
Ielo I., Calabrese G., De Luca G., Conoci S. Recent Advances in Hydroxyapatite-Based Biocomposites for Bone Tissue Regeneration in Orthopedics. Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23 (17): 9721. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23179721
Sharon V.M., Malaiappan S. Biocompatibility and periodontal regenerative potential of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles from Portunus Sanguinolentus Shells: A crystallographic, morphological, and molecular gene expression analysis. J Dent. 2025; 157: 105762. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105762
Fidler A.L., Boudko S.P., Rokas A., Hudson B.G. The triple helix of collagens - an ancient protein structure that enabled animal multicellularity and tissue evolution. J Cell Sci. 2018; 131 (7): jcs203950. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.203950
Selvaraj V., Sekaran S., Dhanasekaran A., Warrier S. Type 1 collagen: Synthesis, structure and key functions in bone mineralization. Differentiation. 2024; 136: 100757. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diff.2024.100757
Seibel M.J. Biochemical markers of bone turnover: part I: biochemistry and variability. Clin Biochem Rev. 2005; 26 (4): 97-122.
Pramanik S., Aggarwal A., Kadi A., Alhomrani M., Alamri A.S., Alsanie W.F., et al. Chitosan alchemy: transforming tissue engineering and wound healing. RSC Adv. 2024; 14 (27): 19219-19256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/D4RA01594K
Vaidya G., Pramanik S., Kadi A., Rayshan A.R., Abualsoud B.M., Ansari M.J., et al. Injecting hope: chitosan hydrogels as bone regeneration innovators. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2024; 35 (5): 756-797. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09205063.2024.2304952
Kim Y., Zharkinbekov Z., Raziyeva K., Tabyldiyeva L., Berikova K., Zhumagul D., et al. Chitosan-Based Biomaterials for Tissue Regeneration. Pharmaceutics. 2023; 15 (3): 807. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15030807
Kudiyarasu S., Karuppan Perumal M.K., Rajan Renuka R., Manickam Natrajan P. Chitosan composite with mesenchymal stem cells: Properties, mechanism, and its application in bone regeneration. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024; 275 (Pt 1): 133502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.133502
Aguilar A., Zein N., Harmouch E., Hafdi B., Bornert F., Offner D., et al. Application of Chitosan in Bone and Dental Engineering. Molecules. 2019; 24 (16): 3009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24163009
Oh Y., Ahn C.B., Marasinghe M.P.C.K., Je J.Y. Insertion of gallic acid onto chitosan promotes the differentiation of osteoblasts from murine bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Int J Biol Macromol. 2021; 183: 1410-1418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.05.122
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Parkavi Arumugam, Dhivya Sarathi, Kaarthikeyan Gurumoorthy, Ramanarayana Boyapati.
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
ODOVTOS - Int. J. Dent. Sc. endorses CC BY-NC-SA
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
