Biocompatibility of tautomeric copolymers as a potential biomaterial for tissue engineering

M. LAURA LASTRA; M. SILVINA MOLINUEVO; JUAN M GIUSSI; PATRICIA E. ALLEGRETTI; IWONA BLASZCZYK-LEZAK; CARMEN MIJANGOS; M. SUSANA CORTIZO

Rosario

Congreso; 8vo Congreso Latinoamericano de Órganos Artificiales, Biomateriales e Ingeniería de Tejidos- 8vo COLAOB; 2014

Polymers based on tautomeric monomers are interesting in biomedicine due to the possibility to regulate the composition of the keto-enol equilibrium to obtain materials with changeable polarity as a function of the surrounding environment. In this work we synthetized two new b?ketonitrile copolymer and analyzed the effect of composition (St-co-MOP1 and St-co-MOP2) and topography of the scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. The chemical composition, weight-average molecular weight (Mw) and polydispersity index (PI = Mw/Mn) were: St-co-MOP1, FMOP=0.17, Mw=82,400 g/mol, PI=1.99 and St-co-MOP2, FMOP=0.62, Mw=33,200 g/mol, PI=2.07. The scaffolds were prepared by solvent casting (casted as a film) or nanostructured by infiltration via the melt precursor film wetting method into the anodized aluminium oxide (AAO) nanocavities as previously described [Giussi et al, Polymer 2013]. The scaffolds were designed as SC17 and SN17 for St-co-MOP1 or SC62 and SN62 for St-co-MOP2 , casted and nanostructured respectively. The adhesion, proliferation and osteoblastic differentiation of MC3T3E1 osteoblasts were performed as it was previously reported [Cortizo et al., 2008]. Cells growing on both kind of scaffolds (SC and SN) showed fibroblastoid morphology with good interactions between them and with the substrate. However, cellular processes of osteoblast growing on the SN scaffolds were shorter, with a ruffled like border and restricted to the nanorod exposed surface. MC3T3E1 osteoblasts adhered better on casted scaffolds than on the nanostructured ones or control (culture dishes). The composition of the scaffold also influenced cell adhesion: adhesion was better on scaffolds SC62 and SN62 in comparison with SC17 and SN17 (p