3D bioprinting approaches for spinal cord injury repair.

Regenerative healing of spinal cord injury (SCI) poses an ongoing medical challenge by causing persistent neurological impairment and a significant socioeconomic burden. The complexity of spinal cord tissue presents hurdles to successful regeneration following injury, due to the difficulty of forming a biomimetic structure that faithfully replicates native tissue using conventional tissue engineering scaffolds. 3D bioprinting is a rapidly evolving technology with unmatched potential to create 3D biological tissues with complicated and hierarchical structure and composition. With the addition of biological additives such as cells and biomolecules, 3D bioprinting can fabricate preclinical implants, tissue or organ-like constructs, andin vitromodels through precise control over the deposition of biomaterials and other building blocks. This review highlights the characteristics and advantages of 3D bioprinting for scaffold fabrication to enable SCI repair, including bottom-up manufacturing, mechanical customization, and spatial heterogeneity. This review also critically discusses the impact of various fabrication parameters on the efficacy of spinal cord repair using 3D bioprinted scaffolds, including the choice of printing method, scaffold shape, biomaterials, and biological supplements such as cells and growth factors. High-quality preclinical studies are required to accelerate the translation of 3D bioprinting into clinical practice for spinal cord repair. Meanwhile, other technological advances will continue to improve the regenerative capability of bioprinted scaffolds, such as the incorporation of nanoscale biological particles and the development of 4D printing.

PSME2 offers value as a biomarker of M1 macrophage infiltration in pan-cancer and inhibits osteosarcoma malignant phenotypes.

A growing number of studies have revealed an association between proteasome activator complex subunit 2 (PSME2) and the progression of various forms of cancer. However, the effect of PSME2 on osteosarcoma progression is unknown. Pan-cancer analyses focused on the immunological activity and prognostic relevance of PSME2 have yet to be conducted. The Cancer Genome Atlas and Genome-Tissue Expression databases were leveraged to evaluate PSME2 expression and activity across 33 cancer types. Significant PSME2 dysregulation was noted in a wide range of cancer types and this gene was found to offer significant diagnostic and prognostic utility in most analyzed cancers. From a mechanistic perspective, PSME2 expression levels were correlated with DNA methylation, DNA repair, genomic instability, and TME scores in multiple cancer types. PSME2 was subsequently established as a pan-cancer biomarker of M1 macrophage infiltration based on a combination of bulk, single-cell, and spatial transcriptomic data and confirmatory fluorescent staining results. In osteosarcoma cells, overexpressing PSME2 significantly suppressed tumor proliferative, migratory, and invasive activity. Screening efforts also successfully identified the PSME2-activating drug irinotecan, which can synergistically promote the death of osteosarcoma cells when combined with the chemotherapeutic drug paclitaxel. As a biomarker of M1 macrophage infiltration, PSME2 expression levels may offer insight into tumor development and progression for a wide range of cancers including osteosarcoma, emphasizing its potential utility as a prognostic and therapeutic target worthy of further study.

Preclinical Studies and Clinical Trials on Cell-Based Treatments for Meniscus Regeneration.

This study aims at performing a thorough review of cell-based treatment strategies for meniscus regeneration in preclinical and clinical studies. The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant studies (both preclinical and clinical) published from the time of database construction to December 2022. Data related to cell-based therapies for in situ regeneration of the meniscus were extracted independently by two researchers. Assessment of risk of bias was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Statistical analyses based on the classification of different treatment strategies were performed. A total of 5730 articles were retrieved, of which 72 preclinical studies and 6 clinical studies were included in this review. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), especially bone marrow MSCs (BMSCs), were the most commonly used cell type. Among preclinical studies, rabbit was the most commonly used animal species, partial meniscectomy was the most commonly adopted injury pattern, and 12 weeks was the most frequently chosen final time point for assessing repair outcomes. A range of natural and synthetic materials were used to aid cell delivery as scaffolds, hydrogels, or other morphologies. In clinical trials, there was large variation in the dose of cells, ranging from 16 × 106 to 150 × 106 cells with an average of 41.52 × 106 cells. The selection of treatment strategy for meniscus repair should be based on the nature of the injury. Cell-based therapies incorporating various "combination" strategies such as co-culture, composite materials, and extra stimulation may offer greater promise than single strategies for effective meniscal tissue regeneration, restoring natural meniscal anisotropy, and eventually achieving clinical translation. Impact Statement This review provides an up-to-date and comprehensive overview of preclinical and clinical studies that tested cell-based treatments for meniscus regeneration. It presents novel perspectives on studies published in the past 30 years, giving consideration to the cell sources and dose selection, delivery methods, extra stimulation, animal models and injury patterns, timing of outcome assessment, and histological and biomechanical outcomes, as well as a summary of findings for individual studies. These unique insights will help to shape future research on the repair of meniscus lesions and inform the clinical translation of new cell-based tissue engineering strategies.

Biomaterials for Tissue-Engineered Treatment of Tendinopathy in Animal Models: A Systematic Review.

To conduct a systematic review of studies reporting the treatment of tendon injury using biomaterials in animal models. A systematic search was conducted to retrieve studies involving animal models of tendon repair using biomaterials, in PubMed (database construction to August 2022) and Ovid-Embase (1946 to August 2022). Data related to tendon repair with biomaterials were extracted by two researchers, respectively. Risk of bias was assessed following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A statistical analysis was performed based on the classification of tendon repair biomaterials included in our study. A total of 8413 articles were retrieved, with 78 studies included in our analysis. For tendon repair in animal models using biomaterials, the most commonly seen characteristics were as follows: naturally derived biomaterials, rabbits and rats as animal models, surgery as the injury model, and the Achilles tendon as the injury site. The histology and biomechanical recovery of tendon injury following repair are affected by different biomaterials. Studies of tendon repair in animal models indicate that biomaterials can significantly improve repair outcomes, including tendon structure and biomechanics. Among effective biomaterial strategies are the use of new composites and incorporation of cells or growth factors into the material, both of which provide obvious benefits for tendon healing. More high-quality preclinical studies are required to encourage the translation of biomaterials into clinical practice for tendon repair.

Failure modes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The reason for graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is multifactorial. Controversies remain regarding the predominant factor and incidence of failure aetiology in the literature. This review aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the literature to evaluate the relative proportion of various failure modes among patients with ACLR failure. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases were searched for literature on ACLR failure or revision from 1975 to 2021. Data related to causes for ACLR surgical failure were extracted, and a random effects model was used to pool the results, which incorporates potential heterogeneity. Failure modes were compared between different populations, research methods, graft types, femoral portal techniques, and fixation methods by subgroup analysis or linear regression. Funnel plots were used to identify publication bias and small-study effects. RESULTS: A total of 39 studies were analyzed, including 33 cohort studies and six registry-based studies reporting 6578 failures. The results showed that among patients with ACLR failure or revision, traumatic reinjury was the most common failure mode with a rate of 40% (95% CI: 35-44%), followed by technical error (34%, 95% CI: 28-42%) and biological failure (11%, 95% CI: 7-15%). Femoral tunnel malposition was the most common cause of the technical error (29%, 95% CI: 18-41%), with more than two times higher occurrence than tibial tunnel malposition (11%, 95% CI: 6-16%). Traumatic reinjury was the most common factor for ACLR failure in European populations and in recent studies, while technical errors were more common in Asian populations, earlier studies, and surgery performed using the transtibial (TT) portal technique. Biological factors were more likely to result in ACLR failure in hamstring (HT) autografts compared to bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts. CONCLUSION: Trauma is the most important factor leading to surgical failure or revision following ACLR. Technical error is also an important contributing factor, with femoral tunnel malposition being the leading cause of error resulting in failure.