3 research outputs found
Development and optimisation of hydrogel scaffolds for microvascular network formation
Traumatic injuries are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide; however, there is limited research on microvascular traumatic injuries. To address this gap, this research aims to develop and optimise an in vitro construct for traumatic injury research at the microvascular level. Tissue engineering constructs were created using a range of polymers (collagen, fibrin, and gelatine), solvents (PBS, serum-free endothelial media, and MES/NaCl buffer), and concentrations (1–5% w/v). Constructs created from these hydrogels and HUVECs were evaluated to identify the optimal composition in terms of cell proliferation, adhesion, migration rate, viability, hydrogel consistency and shape retention, and tube formation. Gelatine hydrogels were associated with a lower cell adhesion, whereas fibrin and collagen ones displayed similar or better results than the control, and collagen hydrogels exhibited poor shape retention; fibrin scaffolds, particularly at high concentrations, displayed good hydrogel consistency. Based on the multipronged evaluation, fibrin hydrogels in serum-free media at 3 and 5% w/v were selected for further experimental work and enabled the formation of interconnected capillary-like networks. The networks formed in both hydrogels displayed a similar architecture in terms of the number of segments (10.3 ± 3.21 vs. 9.6 ± 3.51) and diameter (8.6446 ± 3.0792 μm vs. 7.8599 ± 2.3794 μm)
Redefining biomaterial biocompatibility: challenges for artificial intelligence and text mining
The surge in ‘Big data’ has significantly influenced biomaterials research and development, with vast data volumes emerging from clinical trials, scientific literature, electronic health records, and other sources. Biocompatibility is essential in developing safe medical devices and biomaterials to perform as intended without provoking adverse reactions. Therefore, establishing an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven biocompatibility definition has become decisive for automating data extraction and profiling safety effectiveness. This definition should both reflect the attributes related to biocompatibility and be compatible with computational data-mining methods. Here, we discuss the need for a comprehensive and contemporary definition of biocompatibility and the challenges in developing one. We also identify the key elements that comprise biocompatibility, and propose an integrated biocompatibility definition that enables data-mining approaches.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version
Development and Optimisation of Hydrogel Scaffolds for Microvascular Network Formation
Traumatic injuries are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide; however, there is limited research on microvascular traumatic injuries. To address this gap, this research aims to develop and optimise an in vitro construct for traumatic injury research at the microvascular level. Tissue engineering constructs were created using a range of polymers (collagen, fibrin, and gelatine), solvents (PBS, serum-free endothelial media, and MES/NaCl buffer), and concentrations (1–5% w/v). Constructs created from these hydrogels and HUVECs were evaluated to identify the optimal composition in terms of cell proliferation, adhesion, migration rate, viability, hydrogel consistency and shape retention, and tube formation. Gelatine hydrogels were associated with a lower cell adhesion, whereas fibrin and collagen ones displayed similar or better results than the control, and collagen hydrogels exhibited poor shape retention; fibrin scaffolds, particularly at high concentrations, displayed good hydrogel consistency. Based on the multipronged evaluation, fibrin hydrogels in serum-free media at 3 and 5% w/v were selected for further experimental work and enabled the formation of interconnected capillary-like networks. The networks formed in both hydrogels displayed a similar architecture in terms of the number of segments (10.3 ± 3.21 vs. 9.6 ± 3.51) and diameter (8.6446 ± 3.0792 μm vs. 7.8599 ± 2.3794 μm)