Addressable microfluidics technology for non-sacrificial analysis of biomaterial implants in vivo.

Tissue regeneration-promoting and drug-eluting biomaterials are commonly implanted into animals as a part of late-stage testing before committing to human trials required by the government. Because the trials are very expensive (e.g., they can cost over a billion U.S. dollars), it is critical for companies to have the best possible characterization of the materials' safety and efficacy before it goes into a human. However, the conventional approaches to biomaterial evaluation necessitate sacrificial analysis (i.e., euthanizing a different animal for measuring each time point and retrieving the implant for histological analysis), due to the inability to monitor how the host tissues respond to the presence of the material in situ. This is expensive, inaccurate, discontinuous, and unethical. In contrast, our manuscript presents a novel microfluidic platform potentially capable of performing non-disruptive fluid manipulations within the spatial constraints of an 8 mm diameter critical calvarial defect-a "gold standard" model for testing engineered bone tissue scaffolds in living animals. In particular, here, addressable microfluidic plumbing is specifically adapted for the in vivo implantation into a simulated rat's skull, and is integrated with a combinatorial multiplexer for a better scaling of many time points and/or biological signal measurements. The collected samples (modeled as food dyes for proof of concept) are then transported, stored, and analyzed ex vivo, which adds previously-unavailable ease and flexibility. Furthermore, care is taken to maintain a fluid equilibrium in the simulated animal's head during the sampling to avoid damage to the host and to the implant. Ultimately, future implantation protocols and technology improvements are envisioned toward the end of the manuscript. Although the bone tissue engineering application was chosen as a proof of concept, with further work, the technology is potentially versatile enough for other in vivo sampling applications. Hence, the successful outcomes of its advancement should benefit companies developing, testing, and producing vaccines and drugs by accelerating the translation of advanced cell culturing tech to the clinical market. Moreover, the nondestructive monitoring of the in vivo environment can lower animal experiment costs and provide data-gathering continuity superior to the conventional destructive analysis. Lastly, the reduction of sacrifices stemming from the use of this technology would make future animal experiments more ethical.

[1]  Wenting Wang,et al.  3D Printing of PLLA/Biomineral Composite Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds , 2022, Materials.

[2]  Yang Tian,et al.  Real-Time Monitoring of Neurotransmitters in the Brain of Living Animals. , 2022, ACS applied materials & interfaces.

[3]  Q. Cai,et al.  Improving bone regeneration with composites consisting of piezoelectric poly(l-lactide) and piezoelectric calcium/manganese co-doped barium titanate nanofibers , 2022, Composites Part B: Engineering.

[4]  A. Ghanbari,et al.  The healing of bone defects by cell-free and stem cell-seeded 3D-printed PLA tissue-engineered scaffolds , 2021, Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.

[5]  F. Gao,et al.  Three-dimensional printed polylactic acid and hydroxyapatite composite scaffold with urine-derived stem cells as a treatment for bone defects , 2021, Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine.

[6]  Noel Southall,et al.  Clinical development times for innovative drugs , 2021, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[7]  M. Shie,et al.  Fabrication of 3D Printed Poly(lactic acid)/Polycaprolactone Scaffolds Using TGF-β1 for Promoting Bone Regeneration , 2021, Polymers.

[8]  Muhsincan Sesen,et al.  Thermally-actuated microfluidic membrane valve for point-of-care applications , 2021, Microsystems & nanoengineering.

[9]  K. Ahn,et al.  Is the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer guideline for treating intermediate to advanced staged hepatocellular carcinoma still appropriate? , 2021, Annals of translational medicine.

[10]  M. Saito,et al.  A design and optimization of a high throughput valve based microfluidic device for single cell compartmentalization and analysis , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[11]  M. Mckee,et al.  Estimated Research and Development Investment Needed to Bring a New Medicine to Market, 2009-2018. , 2020, JAMA.

[12]  R. Voronov,et al.  Automated Addressable Microfluidic Device for Minimally Disruptive Manipulation of Cells and Fluids within Living Cultures. , 2020, ACS biomaterials science & engineering.

[13]  S. Jana,et al.  A novel surgical technique for a rat subcutaneous implantation of a tissue engineered scaffold , 2018, Acta histochemica.

[14]  S. Basuray,et al.  A compact low-cost low-maintenance open architecture mask aligner for fabrication of multilayer microfluidics devices. , 2018, Biomicrofluidics.

[15]  Yong-Sung Kim,et al.  Production of recombinant human procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide and establishment of a sandwich ELISA for quantification , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[16]  Zhi Zhu,et al.  A fully integrated distance readout ELISA-Chip for point-of-care testing with sample-in-answer-out capability. , 2017, Biosensors & bioelectronics.

[17]  Tyler C. Shimko,et al.  An Open-Source, Programmable Pneumatic Setup for Operation and Automated Control of Single- and Multi-Layer Microfluidic Devices , 2017, bioRxiv.

[18]  Erika L. Varner,et al.  Enhancing Continuous Online Microdialysis Using Dexamethasone: Measurement of Dynamic Neurometabolic Changes during Spreading Depolarization. , 2017, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[19]  Asher Mullard,et al.  Parsing clinical success rates , 2016, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[20]  Jianping Fu,et al.  Desktop aligner for fabrication of multilayer microfluidic devices. , 2015, The Review of scientific instruments.

[21]  Hiroaki Takehara,et al.  Lab-on-a-brain: Implantable micro-optical fluidic devices for neural cell analysis in vivo , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[22]  Robert Langer,et al.  A Perspective on the Clinical Translation of Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering , 2014, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[23]  P. Uppanan,et al.  PLA-HA Scaffolds: Preparation and Bioactivity☆ , 2013 .

[24]  J. Jansen,et al.  Evaluation of bone regeneration using the rat critical size calvarial defect , 2012, Nature Protocols.

[25]  Hajime Ohgushi,et al.  Osteocalcin secretion as an early marker of in vitro osteogenic differentiation of rat mesenchymal stem cells. , 2009, Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods.

[26]  Chang Lu,et al.  A microfluidic cell array with individually addressable culture chambers. , 2008, Biosensors & bioelectronics.

[27]  S. Quake,et al.  Versatile, fully automated, microfluidic cell culture system. , 2007, Analytical chemistry.

[28]  Jessica Melin,et al.  Microfluidic large-scale integration: the evolution of design rules for biological automation. , 2007, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.