Skip to main content

Dual-acting biofunctionalised scaffolds for applications in regenerative medicine


Off the shelf scaffolds for replacing ultra-small diameter vascular grafts are valuable for reconstruction of diseased or damaged vessels. The limitations for such grafts include optimal handling with ready availability of varied lengths of grafts, graft patency with the ability to replace the function of active cellular mechanisms and adequate mechanical properties to maintain physicochemical function. We used a well-established, solvent casting method for potential tissue replacement scaffold fabrication with incorporated bioactive molecules, which we have previously explored to confer haemocompatibility. These grafts were tested in-vivo within the abdominal aorta of 10 Wistar rats and the patency was clinically and echographically evaluated. Haemocompatibility and endothelialisation were assessed on explants. Biofunctionalised scaffolds were also grafted subcutaneously and intraperitoneally to evaluate integration, inflammation and angiogenesis reactions. The potential wider applications of this dual acting scaffold were evaluated for its interactions with human dermal fibroblasts as well as bronchial epithelial cells. Physicochemical property evaluation of the functionalised grafts has clarified the mechanical strength and permeability. This study confirmed the microsurgical suturability of tubular grafts and graft patency of functionalized scaffolds. The study demonstrated the potential of a dual acting biofunctionalised scaffold’s use for a wide range of tissue engineering applications where micro-porous, yet impermeable scaffolds are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5


  1. 1.

    Jen MC, Serrano MC, van Lith R, Ameer GA. Polymer-based nitric oxide therapies: recent insights for biomedical applications Michele. Adv Funct Mater. 2012;22:239–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Kim TG, Shin H, Lim DW. Biomimetic scaffolds for tissue engineering. Adv Funct Mater [Internet]. 2012;22:2446–68. doi:10.1002/adfm.201103083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Zorlutuna P, Vrana NE, Khademhosseini A. The expanding world of tissue engineering: the building blocks and new applications of tissue engineered constructs. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2013;6:47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Briquez PS, Clegg LE, Martino MM, Gabhann FM, Hubbell JA. Design principles for therapeutic angiogenic materials. Nat Rev Mater [Internet]. 2016;1:15006 Available from

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Novosel EC, Kleinhans C, Kluger PJ. Vascularization is the key challenge in tissue engineering. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2011;63:300–11. Available from

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Oates M, Chen R, Duncan M, Hunt JA. The angiogenic potential of three-dimensional open porous synthetic matrix materials. Biomaterials. 2007;28:3679–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Geesala R, Bar N, Dhoke NR, Basak P, Das A. Porous polymer scaffold for on-site delivery of stem cells - Protects from oxidative stress and potentiates wound tissue repair. Biomaterials [Internet]. 2016;77:1–13. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.11.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Guarino V, Causa F, Ambrosio L. Porosity and mechanical properties relationship in PCL porous scaffolds. J Appl Biomater Biomech. 2007;5:149–57.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Loh QL, Choong C. Three-dimensional scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: role of porosity and pore size. Tissue Eng Part B Rev [Internet]. 2013;19:485–502. Available from

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Everett W, Scurr DJ, Rammou A, Darbyshire A, Hamilton G, de Mel A. A material conferring hemocompatibility. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2016;6:26848. Available from

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    de Mel A, Murad F, Seifalian AM. Nitric oxide: a guardian for vascular grafts? Chem Rev [Internet]. 2011;111:5742–67. doi:10.1021/cr200008n.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Ockelford F, Saada L, Mel EG and de A Is nitric oxide assuming a janus-face in the central nervous system? Curr Med Chem. 2016 May 27;23(16):1625–37 Available from:

  13. 13.

    Akter F, Coghlan G, de Mel A. Nitric oxide in paediatric respiratory disorders: novel interventions to address associated vascular phenomena? Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis [Internet]. 2016;10:256–70. Available from

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Iannaccone PM, Jacob HJ. Rats! Dis. Model. & Mech. [Internet]. 2009;2:206 LP-210. Available from:

  15. 15.

    Haruguchi H, Teraoka S. Intimal hyperplasia and hemodynamic factors in arterial bypass and arteriovenous grafts: a review. J Artif Organs [Internet]. 2003;6:227–35. Available from doi:10.1007/s10047-003-0232-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Guillot R, Pignot-Paintrand I, Lavaud J, Decambron A, Bourgeois E, Josserand V, et al. Assessment of a polyelectrolyte multilayer film coating loaded with BMP-2 on titanium and PEEK implants in the rabbit femoral condyle. Acta Biomater [Internet] Acta Materialia Inc. 2016;36:310–22. doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2016.03.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Byrom M, Bannon P, White G, Ng MKC. Animal models for the assessment of novel vascular conduits. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:176–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Lepidi S, Grego F, Vindigni V, Zavan B, Tonello C, Deriu GP, et al. Hyaluronan biodegradable scaffold for small-caliber artery grafting: preliminary results in an animal model. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;32:411–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Swartz DD, Andreadis ST. Animal models for vascular tissue-engineering. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2013;24:916–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Koobatian MT, Row S, Smith RJ Jr, Koenigsknecht C, Andreadis ST, Swartz DD. Successful endothelialization and remodeling of a cell-free small-diameter arterial graft in a large animal model. Biomaterials. 2016;76:344–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Ghanbari H, de Mel A, Seifalian AM. Cardiovascular application of polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane nanomaterials: a glimpse into prospective horizons. Int J Nanomedicine. 2011;6:775–86.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Leong KF, Chua CK, Sudarmadji N, Yeong WY. Engineering functionally graded tissue engineering scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2008;1:140–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Sommer G, Sherifova S, Oberwalder PJ, Dapunt OE, Ursomanno PA, DeAnda A, et al. Mechanical strength of aneurysmatic and dissected human thoracic aortas at different shear loading modes. J Biomech. 2016;49:2374–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    de Mel A, Yap T, Cittadella G, Hale LR, Maghsoudlou P, de Coppi P, et al. A potential platform for developing 3D tubular scaffolds for paediatric organ development. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    de Mel A, Punshon G, Ramesh B, Sarkar S, Darbyshire A, Hamilton G, et al. In situ endothelialisation potential of a biofunctionalised nanocomposite biomaterial-based small diameter bypass graft. Biomed Mater Eng. 2009;19:317–31.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Fu W, Wang Z, Li G, Zhang B, Zhang L, Hu K. A surface-modified biodegradable urethral scaffold seeded with urethral epithelial cells. Chin Med J. 2011;124:3087–92.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Kuppan P, Sethuraman S, Krishnan U. PCL and PCL-gelatin nanofibers as esophageal tissue scaffolds: optimization, characterization and cell-matrix interactions. J Biomed Nanotechnol. 2013;9:1540–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Lv J, Chen L, Zhu Y, Hou L, Liu Y. Promoting epithelium regeneration for esophageal tissue engineering through basement membrane reconstitution. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2014;6:4954–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Maemura T, Kinoshita M, Shin M, Miyazaki H, Tsujimoto H, Ono S, et al. Assessment of a tissue-engineered gastric wall patch in a rat model. Artif Organs. 2012;36:409–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Arroyo AG, Iruela-Arispe ML. Extracellular matrix, inflammation, and the angiogenic response. Cardiovasc Res. 2010;86:226–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Atala A, Bauer SB, Soker S, Yoo JJ, Retik AB. Tissue-engineered autologous bladders for patients needing cystoplasty. Lancet. 2006;367:1241–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Ravi S, Chaikof E. Biomaterials for vascular tissue engineering. Regen Med. 2010;5:1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Authors would like to thank Arnold Darbyshire at UCL for synthesising and providing with polyurethane for this study and Nathalie Poitevin and Jean Luc Vignes at Ecole de Chirurgie, Paris for their support in the microsurgical laboratory. ME is sponsored by University of Alexandria, Egypt and JH is sponsored by Globe Microsystems Ltd UK.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Achala de Mel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Camilo Chaves and Chuanyu Gao contributed equally to the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chaves, C., Gao, C., Hunckler, J. et al. Dual-acting biofunctionalised scaffolds for applications in regenerative medicine. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 28, 32 (2017).

Download citation


  • Endothelial Progenitor Cell
  • Human Bronchial Epithelial Cell
  • Graft Patency
  • Dimethylacetamide
  • Scaffold Fabrication