Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Joints 2018; 06(04): 215-219
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1693458
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Evaluation of Different Seeding Methods for Cell-Seeded Collagen Matrix-Supported Autologous Chondrocyte Transplantation

Marco Viganò 
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Gaia Lugano
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Alessandra Colombini
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Paola De Luca
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Carlotta Perucca Orfei
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Enrico Ragni
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
,
Laura de Girolamo
1   Orthopaedic Biotechnology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

22 December 2017

10 June 2019

Publication Date:
25 July 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose The aim of the present study was to evaluate different methods for the intraoperative seeding of chondrocytes on commercially available collagen I/III matrix, in the context of cell-seeded collagen matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte transplantation (ACT-CS).

Methods Human chondrocytes were enzymatically isolated from cartilage portion of discarded femoral heads of patients who underwent total hip replacement. Chondrocytes were cultured until passage 3, and then used for the experiments. The cells (5.0 × 105) were suspended in two different volumes, 75 and 250 µL, and seeded on a matrix sample with a surface of 1 cm2 by means of a micropipette. Moreover, the direct immersion of the matrix in the cell suspension was evaluated as a possible protocol for chondrocyte seeding. Cell adhesion was allowed for 10, 30, or 60 minutes in all samples before evaluation.

Results Data showed that the seeding time did not affect cell viability and distribution, but there was a great difference between the two volumes of injection. In fact, the use of 75 µL significantly reduced cell viability with respect to both 250 µL seeding volume and the immersion protocol. Indeed, cell distribution resulted homogeneous in the samples seeded with the larger volume and with the immersion protocol.

Conclusion The use of 250 µL/cm2 volume or the immersion protocol for 10 minutes are valuable methods for chondrocyte seeding on collagen matrix in an intraoperative scenario.

Clinical Relevance The protocol of chondrocyte seeding in ACT-CS is extremely variable among available literature reports. Chondrocytes adhesion to the matrix represents a crucial step in this methodology, and the present study provides in vitro indication for the choice of the seeding protocol in the context of ACT-CS.

Keywords

ACT-CS - matrix - chondrocytes - cartilage - intraoperative application
 

  • References

  • 1 Sophia Fox AJ, Bedi A, Rodeo SA. The basic science of articular cartilage: structure, composition, and function. Sports Health 2009; 1 (06) 461-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Aurich M, Hofmann GO, Rolauffs B, Gras F. Differences in injury pattern and prevalence of cartilage lesions in knee and ankle joints: a retrospective cohort study. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2014; 6 (04) 5611
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Madry H, Grün UW, Knutsen G. Cartilage repair and joint preservation : medical and surgical treatment options. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108 (40) 669-677
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fahy N, Alini M, Stoddart MJ. Mechanical stimulation of mesenchymal stem cells: Implications for cartilage tissue engineering. J Orthop Res 2018; 36 (01) 52-63
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 D'Anchise R, Manta N, Prospero E, Bevilacqua C, Gigante A. Autologous implantation of chondrocytes on a solid collagen scaffold: clinical and histological outcomes after two years of follow-up. J Orthop Traumatol 2005; 6 (01) 36-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rosa D, Di Donato SL, Balato G. , et al. How to manage a failed cartilage repair: a systematic literature review. Joints 2017; 5 (02) 93-106
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 McCormack R. The role of arthroscopy in the treatment of degenerative joint disease of the knee. BCMJ 2010; 52 (09) 439-441
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Briggs KK. Microfracture. Cartilage 2010; 1 (02) 78-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Minas T, Von Keudell A, Bryant T, Gomoll AH. The John Insall Award: a minimum 10-year outcome study of autologous chondrocyte implantation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (01) 41-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Saris D, Price A, Widuchowski W. , et al; SUMMIT study group. Matrix-applied characterized autologous cultured chondrocytes versus microfracture: two-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (06) 1384-1394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Steinwachs M, Peterson L, Bobic V, Verdonk P, Niemeyer P. Cell-seeded collagen matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte transplantation (ACT-CS): a consensus statement on surgical technique. Cartilage 2012; 3 (01) 5-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Benthien JP, Behrens P. Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC): combining microfracturing and a collagen I/III matrix for articular cartilage resurfacing. Cartilage 2010; 1 (01) 65-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Steinwachs M. New technique for cell-seeded collagen-matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Arthroscopy 2009; 25 (02) 208-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Marlovits S, Zeller P, Singer P, Resinger C, Vécsei V. Cartilage repair: generations of autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57 (01) 24-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bartlett W, Skinner JA, Gooding CR. , et al. Autologous chondrocyte implantation versus matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation for osteochondral defects of the knee: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87 (05) 640-645
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Crawford DC, DeBerardino TM, Williams III RJ. NeoCart, an autologous cartilage tissue implant, compared with microfracture for treatment of distal femoral cartilage lesions: an FDA phase-II prospective, randomized clinical trial after two years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (11) 979-989
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Steinwachs M, Kreuz PC. Autologous chondrocyte implantation in chondral defects of the knee with a type I/III collagen membrane: a prospective study with a 3-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (04) 381-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Food and Drug Administration. Autologous Cultured Chondrocytes on a Porcine Collagen Membrane. Approval Letter; 2016 (BLA 125603/0). Available at: https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/CellularGeneTherapyProducts/ApprovedProducts/ucm533177.htm . Accessed June 26, 2019
    PubMed
  • 19 Gomoll AH, Ambra LF, Phan A, Mastrocola M, Shah N. Cell-seeded autologous chondrocyte implantation: a simplified implantation technique that maintains high clinical outcomes. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (05) 1028-1036
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Niemeyer P, Lenz P, Kreuz PC. , et al. Chondrocyte-seeded type I/III collagen membrane for autologous chondrocyte transplantation: prospective 2-year results in patients with cartilage defects of the knee joint. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (08) 1074-1082
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Behrens P, Bitter T, Kurz B, Russlies M. Matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation/implantation (MACT/MACI)--5-year follow-up. Knee 2006; 13 (03) 194-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kreulen C, Giza E, Walton J, Sullivan M. Seven-year follow-up of matrix-induced autologous implantation in talus articular defects. Foot Ankle Spec 2018; 11 (02) 133-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Makris EA, Gomoll AH, Malizos KN, Hu JC, Athanasiou KA. Repair and tissue engineering techniques for articular cartilage. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2015; 11 (01) 21-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Haddo O, Mahroof S, Higgs D. , et al. The use of chondrogide membrane in autologous chondrocyte implantation. Knee 2004; 11 (01) 51-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cherubino P, Grassi FA, Bulgheroni P, Ronga M. Autologous chondrocyte implantation using a bilayer collagen membrane: a preliminary report. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2003; 11 (01) 10-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Schneider TE, Karaikudi S. Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) grafting for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Foot Ankle Int 2009; 30 (09) 810-814
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Foldager CB, Gomoll AH, Lind M, Spector M. Cell seeding densities in autologous chondrocyte implantation techniques for cartilage repair. Cartilage 2012; 3 (02) 108-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gigante A, Bevilacqua C, Ricevuto A, Mattioli-Belmonte M, Greco F. Membrane-seeded autologous chondrocytes: cell viability and characterization at surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007; 15 (01) 88-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar