Misleading Pore Size Measurements in Gelatin and Alginate Hydrogels Revealed by Confocal Microscopy.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q3 CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-12 DOI:10.1089/ten.TEC.2024.0117
Alexis Franco, Bo Van Durme, Sandra Van Vlierberghe, Christine Dupont-Gillain
{"title":"Misleading Pore Size Measurements in Gelatin and Alginate Hydrogels Revealed by Confocal Microscopy.","authors":"Alexis Franco, Bo Van Durme, Sandra Van Vlierberghe, Christine Dupont-Gillain","doi":"10.1089/ten.TEC.2024.0117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is a well-documented phenomenon that the porous structure of hydrogels observed with vacuum-based imaging techniques is generated during the freezing and drying process employed prior to observation. Nevertheless, vacuum-based techniques, such as scanning electron microscopy (SEM), are still being commonly used to measure pore sizes in hydrogels, which is often not representative of the actual pore size in hydrated conditions. The frequent underestimation of the impact of freezing and drying on hydrogel structures could stem from a lack of cross-fertilization between materials science and biomedical or food science communities, or from the simplicity and visually appealing nature of SEM imaging, which may lead to an overemphasis on its use. Our study provides a straightforward and impactful way of pinpointing this phenomenon exploiting two hydrogels ubiquitously applied in tissue engineering, including gelatin methacryloyl and alginate as proof-of-concept hydrogels. By comparing images of the samples in the native hydrated state, followed by freezing, freeze-drying, and rehydration using SEM and confocal microscopy, we highlight discrepancies between hydrogel pore sizes in the hydrated versus the dry state. To conclude, our study offers recommendations for researchers seeking insight in hydrogel properties and emphasizes key factors that require careful control when using SEM as a characterization tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":23154,"journal":{"name":"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods","volume":" ","pages":"307-313"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEC.2024.0117","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is a well-documented phenomenon that the porous structure of hydrogels observed with vacuum-based imaging techniques is generated during the freezing and drying process employed prior to observation. Nevertheless, vacuum-based techniques, such as scanning electron microscopy (SEM), are still being commonly used to measure pore sizes in hydrogels, which is often not representative of the actual pore size in hydrated conditions. The frequent underestimation of the impact of freezing and drying on hydrogel structures could stem from a lack of cross-fertilization between materials science and biomedical or food science communities, or from the simplicity and visually appealing nature of SEM imaging, which may lead to an overemphasis on its use. Our study provides a straightforward and impactful way of pinpointing this phenomenon exploiting two hydrogels ubiquitously applied in tissue engineering, including gelatin methacryloyl and alginate as proof-of-concept hydrogels. By comparing images of the samples in the native hydrated state, followed by freezing, freeze-drying, and rehydration using SEM and confocal microscopy, we highlight discrepancies between hydrogel pore sizes in the hydrated versus the dry state. To conclude, our study offers recommendations for researchers seeking insight in hydrogel properties and emphasizes key factors that require careful control when using SEM as a characterization tool.

共聚焦显微镜揭示明胶和藻酸盐水凝胶中孔径测量的误导。
用真空成像技术观察到的水凝胶多孔结构是在观察前的冷冻和干燥过程中产生的,这一现象已得到充分证实。尽管如此,扫描电子显微镜(SEM)等真空成像技术仍常用于测量水凝胶中的孔隙大小,而这往往不能代表水合条件下的实际孔隙大小。冷冻和干燥对水凝胶结构的影响经常被低估,这可能是由于材料科学与生物医学或食品科学界之间缺乏交流,也可能是由于扫描电子显微镜成像的简便性和视觉吸引力,这可能导致对其使用的过度强调。我们的研究提供了一种直接而有影响力的方法,利用组织工程中普遍应用的两种水凝胶(包括明胶甲基丙烯酰(GelMA)和藻酸盐)作为概念验证水凝胶,来精确定位这一现象。通过使用扫描电子显微镜和共聚焦显微镜比较样品在原生水合状态、冷冻、冻干和再水合后的图像,我们突出了水合状态与干燥状态下水凝胶孔隙大小的差异。总之,我们的研究为希望深入了解水凝胶特性的研究人员提供了建议,并强调了在使用 SEM 作为表征工具时需要仔细控制的关键因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.30%
发文量
136
期刊介绍: Tissue Engineering is the preeminent, biomedical journal advancing the field with cutting-edge research and applications that repair or regenerate portions or whole tissues. This multidisciplinary journal brings together the principles of engineering and life sciences in the creation of artificial tissues and regenerative medicine. Tissue Engineering is divided into three parts, providing a central forum for groundbreaking scientific research and developments of clinical applications from leading experts in the field that will enable the functional replacement of tissues. Tissue Engineering Methods (Part C) presents innovative tools and assays in scaffold development, stem cells and biologically active molecules to advance the field and to support clinical translation. Part C publishes monthly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信