Calcified Tissue International

, Volume 73, Issue 6, pp 575–583 | Cite as

In-Situ Visualization and Quantification of Mineralization of Cultured Osteogenetic Cells

  • E. Uchimura
  • H. Machida
  • N. Kotobuki
  • T. Kihara
  • S. Kitamura
  • M. Ikeuchi
  • M. Hirose
  • J. Miyake
  • H. OhgushiEmail author
Laboratory Investigations


An osteoblastic cell line (HOS cells) produces a prominent osteoid matrix with mineralization. Fibroblasts, on the other hand, do not exhibit this mineralization. To evaluate the degree of mineralization, we added calcein to the culture medium and then observed the culture wells by using an image analyzer. The calcein uptake into the cell/matrix layer was detected in the HOS cells but not in the fibroblasts. The calcein uptake was also quantified in situ by using an image analyzer, which revealed high levels in the HOS cells, which correlated well with the calcium content of the mineralized matrix. Rat marrow cells were also cultured in media containing calcein, fetal bovine serum, β-glycerophosphate, L-ascorbic acid 2-phosphate, and with or without dexamethasone. With the dexamethasone, the cells exhibited osteogenic differentiation that resulted in mineralized matrix formation after about 10 days. The matrix formation coincided with the appearance of calcein uptake into the cell/matrix layer, with the amount of calcein uptake increasing with time. By contrast, the culture without the dexamethasone did not exhibit matrix formation and the calcein uptake was negligible. In the case of both HOS cell and rat marrow cell cultures in vitro, calcein did not affect expressions of their alkaline phosphatase activity or osteocalcin production. Furthermore, histologic observation revealed that rat marrow cells subcultured with calcein could show osteogenic ability after in vivo implantation. These results suggest that the current method of detecting calcein uptake in a culture allows the monitoring of the osteogenic capacity of cultured cells, as well as the measurement of the amount of mineralization produced by the osteogenic cells. Given that osteogenic cultured cells/mineralized matrices are used in bone reconstruction surgery, the in situ monitoring method is invaluable in that it allows us to evaluate the osteogenic capacity of in vitro constructs.


Mineralization Calcein Osteoblast Bone marrow Image analysis 



This work was done by the Three-Dimensional Tissue Module Project, METI (A Millennium Project) and supported in part by the R&D Projects in “Advanced Support System for Endoscopic and Other Minimally Invasive Surgery” entrusted from the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) to the Japan Fine Ceramics Center. The authors thank Ms. A. Matsushima for experimental preparation and kind cooperation.


  1. 1.
    Ongpipattanakul, B, Nguyen, T, Zioncheck, TF, Wong, R, Osaka, G, DeGuzman, L, Lee, WP, Beck, LS 1997Development of tricalcium phosphate/amylopectin paste combined with recombinant human transforming growth factor betal as a bone defect filler.J Biomed Mater Res36295305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ono, I, Gunji, H, Kaneko, F, Numazawa, S, Kodama, N, Yoza, S 1993Treatment of extensive cranial bone defects using computer-designed hydroxyapatite ceramics and periosteal flaps.Plast Reconstr Surg92819835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown, KL, Cruess, RL 1982Bone and cartilage transplantation in orthopaedic surgery.J Bone Joint Surg Am64270279PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lasa Jr, C, Hollinger, J, Drohan, W, Macphee, M 1995Delivery of demineralized bone powder by fibrin sealant.Plast Reconstr Surg1714091417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Young, RG, Butlur, DL, Weber, W, Caplan, AI, Gordon, SL, Fink, DJ 1998Use of mesenchymal stem cells in a collagen matrix for Achilles tendon repair.J Orthop Res16406413CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hench, L.L. 1991Surface reaction kinetics and adsorption of biological moietiesJE, D. eds. The bone-biomaterial interface33Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gross, U, Strunz, V 1985The interface of various glasses and glass ceramics with a bony implantation bed.J Biomed Mater Res19251271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ohgushi, H, Goldberg, VM, Caplan, AI 1989Heterotopic osteogenesis in porous ceramics induced by marrow cells.J Orthop Res7568578CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ohgushi, H, Goldberg, VM, Caplan, AI 1989Repair of bone defects with marrow and porous ceramic (experiments in rats).Acta Orthop Scand60334339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ohgushi, H, Dohi, Y, Katuda, T, Tamai, S, Tabata, S, Suwa, Y 1996In vitro bone formation by rat marrow cell culture.J Biomed Mat Res32333340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoshikawa, T, Ohgushi, H, Tamai, S 1996Immediate bone-forming capability of prefabricated osteogenic hydroxyapatite.J Biomed Mat Res32481492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ohgushi, H, Dohi, Y, Yoshikawa, T, Tamai, S, Tabata, S, Okunaga, K, Shibuya, T 1996Osteogenic differentiation of cultured marrow stromal stem cells on the surface of bioactive glass ceramics.J Biomed Mat Res32341348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ohgushi, H, Caplan, AI 1999Stem cell technology and bioceramics: from cell to gene engineering.J Biomed Mat Res48913927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maniatopoulos, C, Sodek, J, Melcher, AH 1988Bone formation in vitro by stromal cells obtained from marrow of young adult rats.Cell Tissue Res254317330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sonobe, H, Mizobuchi, H, Manabe, Y, Furihata, M, Iwata, J 1991Morphological characterization of a newly established human osteosarcoma cell line HS-Os-1, revealing its distinct osteoblastic nature.Virchows Archiv B Cell Pathol Incl Mol Pathol60181187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chiu, VCK, Haynes, DH 1977High and low affinity Ca2+ binding to the sarcoplasmic reticulum.Biophys J18322CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Camarda, AJ, Butler, WT, Finkelman, RD, Nanci, A 1987Immunohistochemical localization of γ-carboxyglutamic acid-containing protein (osteocalcin) in rat bone and dentin.Calcif Tissue Int40349355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weinreb, M, Shinar, D, Rodan, GA 1990Different pattern of alkaline phosphatase, osteopontin and osteocalcin expression in developing rat bone visualized by in situ hybridization.J Bone Miner Res5831842CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yoshikawa, T, Ohgushi, H, Akahane, M, Tamai, S, Ichijima, K 1998Analysis of gene expression in osteogenic cultured marrow/hydroxyapatite construct implanted at ectopic sites: a comparison with the osteogenic ability of cancellous bone.J Biomed Mater Res41568573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hale, LV, Ma, YF, Santerre, RF 2000Semi-quantitative fluorescence analysis of calcein binding as a measurement of in vitro mineralization.Calcif Tissue Int678084CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Satomura, K, Nagayama, M 1991Ultrastructure of mineralized nodules formed in rat bone marrow stromal cell culture in vitro.Acta Anat14297104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McGee-Russel, SM 1958Histochemical methods for calcium.J Histochem62242Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoshikawa, T, Ohgushi, H, Nakajima, H, Yamada, E, Ichijima, K, Tamai, S, Ohta, T 2000In vivo osteogenic durability of cultured bone in porous ceramics.Transplantation69128134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Uchimura
    • 1
  • H. Machida
    • 1
  • N. Kotobuki
    • 1
  • T. Kihara
    • 1
  • S. Kitamura
    • 1
  • M. Ikeuchi
    • 1
  • M. Hirose
    • 1
  • J. Miyake
    • 1
  • H. Ohgushi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Tissue Engineering Research Center (TERC)National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)HyogoJapan

Personalised recommendations