Engineering Quasi-Vivo® in Vitro Organ Models

  • Tommaso Sbrana
  • Arti AhluwaliaEmail author
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 745)


Cell culture is the workhorse of biologists, toxicologists, tissue engineers and a whole host of research fields in both academia and industry. Having explored individual molecular mechanisms inside cells for decades using traditional cell culture techniques, researchers have only just begun to appreciate that the intricate interconnectivity between cells and cellular networks as well as with the external environment is far more important to cellular orchestration than are single molecular events inside the cell. For example many questions regarding cell, tissue, organ and system response to drugs, environmental toxins, stress and nutrients cannot possibly be answered by concentrating on the minutiae of what goes on in the deepest recesses of single cells. New models are required to investigate cellular cross-talk between different cell types and to construct complex in-vitro models to properly study tissue, organ and system interaction without resorting to animal experiments. This chapter describes how tissue and organ models can be developed using the Quasi-Vivo® system and discusses how they may be used in drug toxicity studies.


Wall Shear Stress Human Hepatocyte Organ Model Allometric Scaling Allometric Exponent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kirkpatrick J, Fuchs S, Hermanns I et al. Cell culture models of higher complexity in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, Biomaterials 2007; 28(34):5193–5198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang S. Beyond the petri dish. Nat Biotechnol 2004; 22(2):151–152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cantòn I, Cole DM, Kemp EH et al. Development of a 3D human in vitro skin co-culture model for detecting irritants in real-time. Biotechnol Bioeng 2010; 106(5):794–803.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van de Bovenkamp M, Groothuis GM, Meijer DK et al. Liver fibrosis in vitro: cell culture models and precision-cut liver slices. Toxicol In Vitro 2007; 21(4):545–557.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sung, JH, Esch MB, Shuler ML. Integration of in silico and in vitro platforms for pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic modeling. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2010; 6(9):1063–1081.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mazzei D, Guzzardi MA, Giusti S et al. A low shear stress modular bioreactor for connected cell culture under high flow rates. Biotechnol Bioeng 2010; 106(1):127–137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Di Nardo P, Minieri M, Ahluwalia A. Engineering the stem cell niche and the differentiative micro and macroenvironment: technologies and tools for applying biochemical, physical and structural stimuli and their effects on stem cells. In: Artmann GM, Minger S, Hescheler J, eds. Stem Cell Engineering: Principles and Applications. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2010:41–48.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith MK, Mooney DJ. Hypoxia leads to necrotic hepatocyte death. J Biomed Mater Res A 2007; 80(3):520–529.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Swartz MA, Fleury ME. Interstitial flow and its effects in soft tissues. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2007; 9:229–256.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pedersen JA, Boschetti F, Swartz MA. Effects of extracellular fiber architecture on cell membrane shear stress in a 3D fibrous matrix. J Biomech 2007; 10:1484–1492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang DM, Tabell JM. Modeling interstitial flow in an artery wall allows estimation of wall shear stress on smooth muscle cells. Trans ASME 1995; 117:358–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tilles AW, Baskaran H, Roy P et al. Effects of oxygenation and flow on the viability and function of rat hepatocytes cocultured in a microchannel flat-plate bioreactor. Biotechnol Bioeng 2001; 73(5):379–389.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vinci B, Duret C, Klieber S et al. Medium flow stimulates expression and activity of detoxication genes in primary human hepatocytes in a multicompartment modular bioreactor. Biotech J 2011;6(5):554–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wei CW, Cheng JY, Young TH. Elucidating in vitro cell-cell interaction using a microfluidic coculture system. Biomed Microdevices 2006; 8(1):65–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tirella A, Marano M, Vozzi F et al. A microfluidic gradient maker for toxicity testing of bupivacaine and lidocaine. Toxicol in Vitro 2008; 22:1957–1964.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McBeath R, Pirone DM, Nelson CM et al. Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell 2004; 6(4):483–495.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Francis K, Palsson BO. Effective intercellular communication distances are determined by the relative time constants for cyto/chemokine secretion and diffusion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1997; 94:12258–12262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kilian KA, Bugarija B, Lahn BT et al. Geometric cues for directing the differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010; 107(11):4872–4877.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vozzi F, Heinrich JM, Bader A et al. Connected culture of murine hepatocytes and HUVEC in a multicompartmental bioreactor. Tissue Eng Part A 2009; 15(6):1291–1299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guzzardi MA, Vozzi F, Ahluwalia A. Study of the cross-talk between hepatocytes and HUVEC using a novel multi compartmental bioreactor: a comparison between connected cultures and co-cultures. Tissue Eng Part A 2009; 15(11):3635–3644.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guillouzo A. Liver cell models in vitro toxicology. Environ Health Perspect 1998; 106:551–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nahmias Y, Berthiaume F, Yarmush ML. Integration of technologies for hepatic tissue engineering. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 2007; 103:309–329.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    West BG, Brown JH, eds. Scaling in Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pichard L, Raulet E, Fabre G et al. Human hepatocyte culture. Methods Mol Biol 2006; 320:283–293.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lindstedt SL, Calder WA. Body size, physiological time and longevity of homeothermic animals. The Q Rev Biol 1981; 56(1):1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vinci B, Cavallone D, Mazzei D et al. In vitro liver model using microfabricated scaffolds in a modular bioreactor. Biotechnol J 2010; 5(2):232–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guillouzo A, Guguen-Guillouzo C. Evolving concepts in liver tissue modeling and implications for in vitro toxicology. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2008; 1279–1294.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boelsterli UA. Diclofenac-induced liver injury: a paradigm of idiosyncratic drug toxicity. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2003; 192(3):307–322.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roque B, Ponsoda X, Jover R et al. Diclofenac toxicity to hepatocytes: a role for drug metabolism in cell toxicity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1999; 288(1):65–72.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Landes Bioscience and Springer Science+Business Media 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro Interdipartimentale di Ricerca “E. Piaggio,”University of PisaPisaItaly
  2. 2.Kirkstall Ltd.The Sheffield BioIncubatorSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations