Silk Fibroin Microparticle Scaffold for Use in Bone Void Filling: Safety and Efficacy Studies.

Silk fibroin (SF) is a natural biocompatible protein polymer extracted from cocoons of silkworm Bombyx mori. SF can be processed into a variety of different forms and shapes that can be used as scaffolds to support bone regeneration. Three-dimensional (3D) SF scaffolds have shown promise in bone-void-filling applications. In in vitro studies, it has been demonstrated that a microparticle-based SF (M-RSF) scaffold promotes the differentiation of stem cells into an osteoblastic lineage. The expression of differentiation markers was also significantly higher for M-RSF scaffolds as compared to other SF scaffolds and commercial ceramic scaffolds. In this work, we have evaluated the in vitro and in vivo biocompatibility of M-RSF scaffolds as per the ISO 10993 guidelines in a Good Laboratory Practice (GLP)-certified facility. The cytotoxicity, immunogenicity, genotoxicity, systemic toxicity, and implantation studies confirmed that the M-RSF scaffold is biocompatible. Further, the performance of the M-RSF scaffold to support bone formation was evaluated in in vivo bone implantation studies in a rabbit model. Calcium sulfate (CaSO4) scaffolds were chosen as reference material for this study as they are one of the preferred materials for bone-void-filling applications. M-RSF scaffold implantation sites showed a higher number of osteoblast and osteoclast cells as compared to CaSO4 implantation sites indicating active bone remodeling. The number density of osteocytes was double for M-RSF scaffold implantation sites, and these M-RSF scaffold implantation sites were characterized by enhanced collagen deposition, pointing toward a finer quality of the new bone formed. Moreover, the M-RSF scaffold implantation sites had a negligible incidence of secondary fractures as compared to the CaSO4 implantation sites (∼50% sites with secondary fracture), implying a reduction in postsurgical complications. Thus, the study demonstrates that the M-RSF scaffold is nontoxic for bone-void-filling applications and facilitates superior healing of fracture defects as compared to commercial calcium-based bone void fillers.

[1]  P. Venugopalan,et al.  Silk fibroin and ceramic scaffolds: Comparative in vitro studies for bone regeneration , 2020, Bioengineering & translational medicine.

[2]  N. Lang,et al.  The effect of synthetic bone graft substitutes on bone formation in rabbit calvarial defects , 2021, Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine.

[3]  A. Qian,et al.  The Bone Extracellular Matrix in Bone Formation and Regeneration , 2020, Frontiers in Pharmacology.

[4]  Arnaud Scherberich,et al.  Natural Polymeric Scaffolds in Bone Regeneration , 2020, Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology.

[5]  Jong-Keon Oh,et al.  Review of bone graft and bone substitutes with an emphasis on fracture surgeries , 2019, Biomaterials Research.

[6]  A. Musset,et al.  Bone substitutes: a review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management , 2018, Journal of tissue engineering.

[7]  Furqan A. Shah,et al.  A Review of the Impact of Implant Biomaterials on Osteocytes , 2018, Journal of dental research.

[8]  P. Venugopalan,et al.  Silk fibroin micro-particle scaffolds with superior compression modulus and slow bioresorption for effective bone regeneration , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[9]  Liyang Shi,et al.  Self‐Healing Silk Fibroin‐Based Hydrogel for Bone Regeneration: Dynamic Metal‐Ligand Self‐Assembly Approach , 2017 .

[10]  J. Klein-Nulend,et al.  Aging, Osteocytes, and Mechanotransduction , 2017, Current Osteoporosis Reports.

[11]  E. Itoi,et al.  Effect of resorption rate and osteoconductivity of biodegradable calcium phosphate materials on the acquisition of natural bone strength in the repaired bone. , 2016, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[12]  K. Kadler,et al.  Deposition of collagen type I onto skeletal endothelium reveals a new role for blood vessels in regulating bone morphology , 2016, Development.

[13]  Aleksandar Matic,et al.  Long-term osseointegration of 3D printed CoCr constructs with an interconnected open-pore architecture prepared by electron beam melting. , 2016, Acta biomaterialia.

[14]  Keita Ito,et al.  Silk fibroin as biomaterial for bone tissue engineering. , 2016, Acta biomaterialia.

[15]  David L Kaplan,et al.  In vivo bioresponses to silk proteins. , 2015, Biomaterials.

[16]  M. Shokrgozar,et al.  Silk as a potential candidate for bone tissue engineering. , 2015, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[17]  D. Dennis,et al.  Biomaterial Hypersensitivity: Is It Real? Supportive Evidence and Approach Considerations for Metal Allergic Patients following Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2015, BioMed research international.

[18]  T. Alliston Biological Regulation of Bone Quality , 2014, Current Osteoporosis Reports.

[19]  D. Fawcett,et al.  Engineering a Biocompatible Scaffold with Either Micrometre or Nanometre Scale Surface Topography for Promoting Protein Adsorption and Cellular Response , 2013, International journal of biomaterials.

[20]  David L. Kaplan,et al.  High-strength silk protein scaffolds for bone repair , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  G. Raoul,et al.  Les biomatériaux de substitution osseuse: classification et intérêt , 2011 .

[22]  A. Boskey,et al.  Aging and Bone , 2010, Journal of dental research.

[23]  L. Podaropoulos,et al.  Bone regeneration using beta-tricalcium phosphate in a calcium sulfate matrix. , 2009, The Journal of oral implantology.

[24]  M. Tzaphlidou Bone Architecture: Collagen Structure and Calcium/Phosphorus Maps , 2008, Journal of biological physics.

[25]  D. Basketter,et al.  Skin Irritation and Sensitization: Mechanisms and New Approaches for Risk Assessment , 2008, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[26]  S. Morgan,et al.  Use of calcium-based demineralized bone matrix/allograft for nonunions and posttraumatic reconstruction of the appendicular skeleton: preliminary results and complications. , 2007, The Journal of trauma.

[27]  David L Kaplan,et al.  The inflammatory responses to silk films in vitro and in vivo. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[28]  S. Parikh Bone graft substitutes in modern orthopedics. , 2002, Orthopedics.

[29]  C. Kelly,et al.  The Use of a Surgical Grade Calcium Sulfate as a Bone Graft Substitute: Results of a Multicenter Trial , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[30]  W. S. Pietrzak,et al.  Calcium sulfate bone void filler: a review and a look ahead. , 2000, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.