Content uploaded by Véronique Migonney
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Véronique Migonney on Mar 06, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Véronique Migonney
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Véronique Migonney on Mar 21, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 1
Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering 00 (20xx) 1–9 1
DOI 10.3233/BME-130753
IOS Press
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
PolyNaSS bioactivation of LARS artificial
ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast
colonisation in vitro
Soucounda Lessim, Véronique Migonney, Patricia Thoreux, Didier Lutomski ∗and
Sylvie Changotade
UFR SMBH, Université Paris 13 Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France and Laboratoire de
Biomatériaux et Polymères de Spécialité, LBPS/CSPBAT CNRS UMR 7244, Université Paris 13
Sorbonne Paris Cité, Villetaneuse, France
Abstract.
BACKGROUND: Introduction of a new generation of artificial ligaments for ACL reconstruction, the Ligament Augmen-
tation and Reconstruction System (LARS), gives promising clinical results [1]. The current literature supports the use of LARS
from short to medium term. To go even further to improve the biocompatibility of this biomaterial, poly(sodium styrene sul-
fonate) (polyNaSS) was grafted onto its surface. Studies using sheep animal model showed improvement of knee functionalities
with this grafted artificial ligament and a better adhesion of human cell lines.
OBJECTIVES: To better understand this in vivo improvement of integration with the bioactivated artificial prosthesis, in
vitro studies were leaded using human ligament fibroblasts.
METHODS: Human ligament fibroblasts isolated from human ruptured ACL were amplified and seeded onto poly(NaSS)
grafted and non-grafted PET scaffold (Lars ligament) under standard culture conditions. Cellularized fibers were observed
under scanning electron microscopy and histological and immunohistological studies were performed.
RESULTS: Cells are localized around the grafted PET fibers of the bioactive ligament and penetrate in the scaffold. On
ungrafted fibers, cells stay around the scaffold. On grafted fibers, collagen I appears strongly organized whereas is thin and
dispersed on non grafted fibers. Finally, grafting altered localization of decorin.
CONCLUSIONS: PolyNaSS grafting enhances human ligament fibroblast organisation in vitro in contact with biomaterial
and improves collagen and decorin deposits around fibers.
Keywords: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), fibroblast, matrix, biointegration, biomaterial, bioactive surface
1. Background
Different methods have been used to restore knee stability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rup-
ture. One of them is the use of patellar tendon or iliotibial tract. However the use of these autogenic
tissues has some drawbacks related to donor site morbidity and the delay to recover normal physi-
cal performance. Reconstruction by allograft carries risk of infection and disease transmission. The
use of artificial ligaments which avoid those complications may offer a good alternative. Among them,
polyethylene terephtalate (PET) ligament represent a good candidate because of its mechanical proper-
ties resistance and elasticity. However, ruptures and synoviotis were frequently observed with this PET
*Address for correspondence: Didier Lutomski, UFR SMBH, Université Paris 13 Sorbonne Paris Cité, 74, rue Marcel Cachin,
93017 Bobigny, France. Tel.: +33 1 48 38 77 54; Fax: +33 1 48 38 77 53.
0959-2989/13/$27.50 ©2013 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 2
2S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
prosthesis mainly due to the abrasion of the fiber structure and the uncontrolled inflammatory response
leading to low tissue integration. The “biointegration” of these materials is one of the key of success
for surgery. In order to improve the host response, which depends on the physico-chemical properties of
the polymer surface, we developed with the LARS company a new bioactive PET ligament prosthesis
by grafting a bioactive polymer, poly(sodium styrene sulfonate) (polyNaSS), onto LARS prosthesis sur-
face [2–4]. Previous studies, showed improvement of the knee functionalities with the grafted artificial
ligament in the sheep and a better adhesion of human cell lines [5–7].
2. Objectives
The aim of this study was to investigate the behaviour of human ligament fibroblasts onto a functional-
ized artificial ACL prosthesis, focusing on 3D cell proliferation, morphology, organization and synthesis
of extracellular matrix components. LARS ligament was made bioactive by grafting of PolyNaSS, an
anionic polymer [2–5].
3. Methods
3.1. Cell isolation
Human ACL fibroblasts (hLF) were isolated from human ruptured Anterior Cruciate Ligament (rACL)
from three patients aged from 22 to 56 years old undergoing knees anterior cruciate ligament reconstruc-
tion.
Cells were isolated by enzymatic digestion under sterile conditions according to the method described
by Kobayashi et al. [8] and Nagineni et al. [9]. Briefly tissues were cut into small pieces (1 ×1 mm),
thoroughly washed in phosphate buffered saline (PBS), placed into centrifugation tube and covered with
6 ml of collagenase type IA (1 mg/ml) (Sigma, France) for 6 h at 37◦C, under shaking. Cells suspen-
sions were then centrifuged at 2,100 rpm for 10 min. Cell pellets were then rinsed twice with PBS
and resuspended in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) supplemented with 20% foetal calf
serum (FCS) and antibiotics (penicillin, streptomycin) in a 25 cm2flask and incubated at 37◦Cand
5% CO2. Culture medium was renewed every 3 days. After 72 h, non-adherent cells were removed by
changing medium. When reaching 70–80% confluence, adherent cells were freed from the flask with
0.05% trypsin-EDTA and sub-cultured in a 75 cm2flask (Corning) DMEM containing 10% FCS, peni-
cillin (100 U/ml), streptomycin (100 µg/ml). A homogenous fibroblasts population was obtained after
2 weeks of culture. When reach sufficient number, cells are freed as previously described, centrifuged at
500 g during 10 min and resuspended at sufficient concentration for following experiments.
3.2. LARS ligament preparation
Samples used for this study were knitted PET fabrics of 3 ×1.0cm
2in size and 1.1 mm in thickness
[10–12]. The knitted fabrics were provided by the LARS Company (Arc sur Tille, France) and were
fabricated by the same process used to produce artificial ligaments [4,13]. PET fabrics were washed
sequentially at ambient temperature, in tetrahydrofuran (THF) for 15 min and intensively wash in double
distilled water. Samples were incubated for 10 min in a sodium carbonate solution (5%, m/v), in a
sleazy boiling. Once reached, articular fibers were washed again in double distilled water, and then dried
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 3
S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro 3
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
under vacuum at 50◦C for 1 h. Knitted PET are conditioned by a series of washing before seeding cells
according to the method described by Migonney et al. [14]. Poly(NaSS) grafted and non-grafted samples
are referenced “grafted or non grafted scaffold”.
3.3. Proliferation onto LARS ligament (3D proliferation)
Cell proliferation of ACL fibroblasts onto the LARS ligament was assessed. Cells from passage 3–7
were seeded at 105cells/LARS ligament piece. Then samples were incubated overnight at 37◦C, 5%
CO2and 95% humidity, to improve cell adhesion. Seeded samples were then recovered with DMEM
10% FBS. Medium were changed every 3 days.
After 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35 days of culture, cells were detached from LARS ligament with trypsin
(0.05%) collagenase (0.025%) [15] and counted with a Coulter counter system (Beckman Coulter) to
assess cell proliferation: cells harvested were resuspended in DMEM 10% SVF and counted with the
coulter counter system.
3.4. Giemsa staining
After 7, 14, 21 and 28 days cells seeded ligament were rinsed in PBS and fixed in 4% paraformalde-
hyde for 48 h. Seeded scaffold were then stained with Giemsa for 15 min and washed twice in distilled
water before observation under transmitted light.
3.5. Immunodetection of collagen I and decorin
In this work we also investigate the secretion of matrix components by fibroblasts seeded onto the scaf-
fold. Seeded scaffold were first fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 48 h, dehydrated and then embedded
in paraffin. Serial tissue sections of 7 µm thick were done with a manual microtome and indirect im-
munodetection were conducted. Briefly, paraffin-embedded sections were deparaffinized and hydrated
through xylene and a graded series of alcohol. Sections were rinsed for 10 min in phosphate buffer
sodium (PBS). Endogenous peroxidase activity was blocked by incubation in 3% (v/v) H2O2for 5 min.
Scaffold sections were washed in PBS for 10 min, incubated for 20 min at 37◦C with goat serum (10%)
or non-fat milk (1%) diluted in a PBS Tween (0.05%) BSA (1%) solution. Scaffold sections were then
incubated for 30 min with a primary polyclonal antibody against collagen type I (1/50 dilution; TEBU-
BIO) or decorin (1/20 dilution, R and D systems), in PBS and then washed three times for 5 min in PBS.
The absence of primary antibody was used as a blank, and controls were performed using non-immune
mouse serum. Sections were then incubated with secondary antibody (anti-rabbit IgG or anti-goat IgG)
conjugated with peroxidase (Amersham Biosciences) for 30 min and were then washed three times for
5 min in PBS and in Tris-HCl buffer. Sections were then incubated in peroxidase substrate solution (di-
aminobenzidine) in a dark chamber for 20 min, rinsed in distilled water (twice for 5 min), cleared and
mounted for observation under a light microscope.
3.6. Scanning electron microscopy
After cell culture, samples were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 48 h, and conserved in 70% ethanol
until analysis. LARS scaffold surfaces were investigated using an environmental scanning electron mi-
croscope (Hitachi TM3000, Japan). The microscope was operated at 12–25 kV under a 10−4–10−5Tor r
vacuum. Images were acquired and were visualized on a computerized digital imaging system magnifi-
cation ×250 and ×1.0k, observation conditions: 15 kV, observation mode: standard mode, image mode:
COMPO, room temperature: 18◦C.
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 4
4S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
4. Results
4.1. Proliferation of fibroblasts from ruptured ACL in 3D culture
All cells strains proliferate on the scaffold as illustrated in Fig. 1. The three cells strain did not have
the same rate of proliferation. Nevertheless, for each strain there is no significative variation regardless
the surface of the biomaterial considered: grafting does not altered cell proliferation.
4.2. Cell organization and localization
Giemsa staining shows cell localization. Cells on both, non grafted and grafted scaffolds, are longi-
tudinally oriented. Their density increased during the culture (data not shown). At 14 days of culture,
difference of cells organization between grafted and non grafted scaffold are visible. On non-grafted
scaffold, cells were localised at the periphery of the bundles and surround them (Fig. 2(a)). On grafted
scaffold, cells were not only at the periphery of the bundles but also inside bundles and around fibers
(Fig. 2(b)).
4.3. Immunodetection of collagen I
Immunoperoxydase labeling of collagen I revealed a positive staining on non-grafted as well as on
grafted scaffold starting from 7 days of culture (data not shown).
Fig. 1. Human fibroblasts ligament proliferation in 3D culture. (Colors are visible in the online version of the article;
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/BME-130753.)
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 5
S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro 5
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
Fig. 2. Giemsa staining of seeded ungrafted (a) and grafted (b) PET after 14 days of culture. Black arrows: cell nuclei; white
arrows: fibers. (The colors are visible in the online version of the article; http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/BME-130753.)
Fig. 3. Collagen I labelling after 28 days of culture in ungrafted (a) and grafted (b) PET. Black arrows: collagen I labelling;
white arrows: fibers.
At 28 days (Fig. 3) staining was localized both at the periphery of bundles and inside the scaffold
structure. On non-grafted scaffold, collagen I was localized at the periphery of bundles (Fig. 3(a)). On
grafted scaffold, collagen I seems to be more abundant at the periphery and present a sheet-like structure
(Fig. 3(b)).
4.4. Decorin immunodetection
Decorin was detected only at 28 days of culture. At this time of culture, decorin labelling is weakly
expressed both on non-grafted (Fig. 4(a)) and grafted scaffolds (Fig. 4(b)). However on non-grafted
scaffolds, decorin were localized only at the periphery of bundles while on grafted scaffolds, decorin
were also observed around fibers.
4.5. Scanning electron microscopy
Non-grafted and grafted scaffolds after seeding were investigated at 14 days of culture by scanning
electron microscopy. At low magnification both non grafted and grafted scaffolds bundles appeared
covered by cells. On non-grafted scaffold, cells are only at the periphery of bundles linking superficial
fibers (Fig. 5(a), (b), (c)). On grafted scaffold, cells are not only localized at the periphery of bundles but
also inside, between fibres (Fig. 5(d), (e), (f)). Interspaces between fibers of bundles were observed at
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 6
6S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
Fig. 4. Decorin labelling after 28 days of culture on ungrafted (a) and grafted (b) PET. Black arrows: decorin labelling; white
arrows: fibers.
magnification ×250 (Fig. 5(b), (e)) and ×2.0k (Fig. 5(c), (f)). Cells were interconnect with neighbouring
fibers and seemed to synthesize an extracellular matrix (ECM). Whatever the surface cells have a semi-
ovoid or spindle-shape morphology.
5. Discussion/conclusion
The LARS ligament was used as a new generation of artificial ligament because of its innovative de-
sign. Its successful application in ACL reconstruction was reported in the current literature at short term
[10,16,17]. Nevertheless, one study had reported potential risks of late graft failure [18] and other stud-
ies pointed osteoarthritis development [19–22]. Moreover, a recent article reported a case of synovitis
and the presence of a thick fibrous scar tissue around the graft and a poorly organized scar tissue infil-
trated into the graft [23]. This study demonstrated the importance of deeper investigation concerning the
cellular response and the need to improve the biocompatibility of this material.
So, to enhance biocompatibility, our laboratory has developed a new bioactive PET ligament prosthe-
sis by grafting a bioactive polymer, poly(sodium styrene sulfonate) (poly(NaSS)), onto LARS prosthe-
sis surface [4]. We have shown that surface grafting of a bioactive polymer (pNaSS) on a polyethylene
terephtalate (PET) device which is used for ACL reconstruction in clinical situations optimizes the adhe-
sion and the distribution of human and sheep fibroblasts in culture [5,14]. After 3 months of implantation
in the sheep, clinical observations show a better functional recuperation with this modified ligament.
To investigate mechanisms responsible of a better biocompatibility of LARS grafted prosthesis in
vivo, behaviour of fibroblasts from ruptured human ACL was investigated in vitro. Fibroblasts derived
from human ruptured ACL were successfully seeded on both non-grafted and grafted PET scaffolds and
we evaluate cell proliferation, organization and matrix deposit.
In the present study, we demonstrated that human ligament fibroblasts adhere and proliferate both
on non-grafted and grafted scaffold with no significative difference. However concerning the adhesion
process, a previous study from Zhou et al. [6,7] has shown that cell adhesion of human fibroblast cells
McCoy is dependant of the chemistry of the surface. Thus grafting polyNaSS at the surface of LARS
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 7
S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro 7
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
Fig. 5. Fibroblasts organization on LARS prosthesis after 14 days of culture. Black arrows: fibers; white arrows: cells.
ligament improves cell adhesion morphology and increase cell adhesion strength. This previous study
was conducted on short time (4 days of culture) unlike this present study which established first obser-
vation at 7 days, demonstrating that grafting influence cell adhesion morphology during the first days of
culture. Let us point out that another preliminary work from Trieb and colleagues [11] using, fibroblasts
isolated from tractus iliotibialis tissue from hip surgery and osteoblast-like cells MG63 demonstrated
cell adhesion on unmodified LARS ligament.
Hence, here we demonstrate that there is no significative cell proliferation difference whatever the
surfaces, but we point that each cell strain present its own proliferation rate (Fig. 1). This variation is
probably due to the age of donor or the length of rupture. This hypothesis is under investigation.
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 8
8S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
Observations after Giemsa staining are confirmed by scanning electron microscopy. We show that on
grafted surfaces cells not only build a capsule around bundles as shown by Trieb et al. [11] but also
penetrate inside bundles, surround individual fibers and are aligned longitudinally along the length of
fibers (Figs 2 and 5). These results is probably due to the sulfonate groups which conferred hydrophilic
properties and specificity to the grafted PET surface which characteristic can explain the best results
observed in vitro or in vivo when PET was grafted by enhancing adsorption of plasma proteins before
cells adhesion on biomaterial and could promote proliferation [1,24].
In all tested surfaces, cells are able to synthesize collagen type I, which is the major collagen of
ligaments and tendon [25] (Fig. 3). Brune and colleagues show first no significant difference in the gene
expression of collagen I between fibroblasts extracted from intact and ruptured ACL and second that
collagen I is widely distributed through the tissue in the ECM of the ACL fibroblast seeded in an animal
model of porcine small intestinal submucosal extracellular matrix [26]. This would be consistent with the
study conducted by Zhou et al., showing no significative difference in collagen I expression, by RT-PCR
between unmodified and bioactivated ligament [6]. Immunodetection of collagen I in the present study
shows the presence of collagen I on both surfaces. However, on grafted ligament, collagen I is more
organized, presenting a waviness appearance with fibrils oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the
prosthesis as seen in the natural ligament in vivo [25]. So, it seems that grafting enhance organisation of
collagen I at cell surface and it would be of great interest to quantify secreted collagen and to explore in
our condition of grafting the expression of collagen I.
Finally, we have also studied decorin, a small leucine-rich proteoglycan interacted with several ma-
trix molecules, including various types of collagen. Decorin plays a critical role in the organization of
collagen fibrils. Häkkinen and colleagues demonstrated that abnormal expression of decorin might re-
veal abnormal morphology and organization of the collagen fibrils in the periodontal ligament [27–29].
Our results show that decorin was differently distributed throughout the non grafted and grafted scaffold
(Fig. 4). In fact decorin labelling follows that of collagen I on both surfaces, according to it function in
collagen organization [29].
To conclude, in vitro results contribute to explain the better “bio-integration” observed with polyNaSS
grafted ligament in vivo in animal [30]. In fact, cell proliferation and colonization are key parameters
for biointegration of the prosthesis. In our study, we have shown that grafting does not significantly
influence cell proliferation; however it enhances cell organisation and favours collagen and decorin de-
posits around fibers. We will investigate the secretion and the organisation of collagen III and the surface
expression of integrin.
References
[1] M. Dhahri, A. Abed, R. Hadj Lajimi, M. Ben Mansour, V. Gueguen, S. Ben Abdesselem et al., Grafting of dermatan
sulfate on polyethylene terephtalate to enhance biointegration, Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A 98A(1)
(2011), 114–121.
[2] B. Brulez, J.-P. Laboureau, V. Migonney, M. Ciobanu and G. Pavon-Djavid, Ligament prothétique et procédé d’obtention,
2003, 03.00497.
[3] A. Siove, V. Migonney, G. Pavon, M. Ciobanu, B. Brulez and J.P. Laboureau, Procédés de traitement de surface polymères
pour prothèses biomimétiques, 2003, 03.00495.
[4] B. Brulez, J.-P. Laboureau, V. Migonney, M. Ciobanu, G. Pavon-Djavid and A. Siove, Biomimetic prosthetic ligament
and production method thereof, 2004, WO 2004/067051.
[5] M. Ciobanu, A. Siove, V. Gueguen, L. Gamble, D. Castner and V. Migonney, Radical graft polymerization of styrene
sulfonate on poly(ethylene terephthalate) films for ACL applications: “grafting from” and chemical characterization,
Biomacromolecules 7(3) (2006), 755–760.
UNCORRECTED PROOF
BME ios2a v.2013/03/25 arttype:RA Prn:19/04/2013; 10:29 F:bme753.tex; VTEX/Diana p. 9
S. Lessim et al. / LARS artificial ligament promotes human ligament fibroblast colonisation in vitro 9
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
[6] J. Zhou, M. Ciobanu, G. Pavon-Djavid, V. Gueguen and V. Migonney, Morphology and adhesion of human fibroblast cells
cultured on bioactive polymer grafted ligament prosthesis, Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. (2007), 5115–5118.
[7] J. Zhou, M. Manassero, V. Migonney and V. Viateau, Evaluation clinique et biologique d’un ligament synthétique bioactif
chez la brebis, IRBM 30(4) (2009), 153–155.
[8] K. Kobayashi, R.M. Healey, R.L. Sah, J.J. Clark, B.P. Tu, W.H. Gooner et al., Novel method for the quantitative assessment
of cell migration: A study on the motility of rabbit anterior cruciate (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) cells,
Tissue Eng. 6(1) (2000), 29–39.
[9] C.N. Nagineni, D. Amiel, M.H. Green, M. Berchuck and W.H. Akeson, Characterization of the intrinsic properties of the
anterior cruciate and medical collateral ligament an in vitro cell culture study, J. Orthop. Res. 10(4) (1992), 465–475.
[10] G. Dericks, Ligament advanced reinforcement system anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, Operative Techniques in
Sports Medicine 3(3) (1995), 187–205.
[11] K. Trieb, H. Blahovec, G. Brand, M. Sabeti, M. Dominkus and R. Kotz, In vivo and in vitro cellular ingrowth into a new
generation of artificial ligaments, Eur. Surg. Res. 36 (2004), 148–151.
[12] J. Huang, W. Qian, S. Feng, W. Zi-Min et al., Cruciate ligament reconstruction using LARS artificial ligament under
arthroscopy: 81 cases report, Chin. Med. J. 123(2) (2010), 160–164.
[13] Eurasanté, Perspectives de la plasturgie dans l’industtrie biomédicale, 2005.
[14] G. Pavon-Djavid, L. Gamble, M. Ciobanu, V. Gueguen, D. Castner and V. Migonney, Bioactive poly(ethylene terephtha-
late) fibers and fabrics: grafting, chemical characterization, and biological assessment, Biomacromolecules (11) (2007),
3317–3325.
[15] B.R. Pillai and J. Mohanty, Enzymatic digestion – a safe and rapid technique for individual separation of Macrobrachium
rosenbergii embryos for cryopreservation studies, Cryobiology 47 (2003), 242–246.
[16] P. Lavoie, J. Fletcher and N. Duval, Patient satisfaction needs as related to knee stability and objective findings after ACL
reconstruction using the LARS artificial ligament, Knee 7(3) (2000), 157–163.
[17] T. Nau, P. Lavoie and N. Duval, A new generation of artificial ligaments in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament.
Two-year follow-up of a randomised trial, J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 84(3) (2002), 356–360.
[18] J. Mulford and D. Chen, Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of polyethylene terephthalate
grafts, ANZ Journal of Surgery 81(11) (2011), 785–789.
[19] M. Macnicol, I. Penny and L. Sheppard, Early results of the Leeds–Keio anterior cruciate ligament replacement, J. Bone
Joint Surg. Br. 73 (1991), 377–380.
[20] W. Klein and K. Jensen, Synovitis and artificial ligaments, Arthroscopy 8(1992), 116–124.
[21] R. Prescott, W. Ryan and D. Bisset, Histopathological features of failed prosthetic Leeds–Keio anterior cruciate ligaments,
J. Clin. Pathol. 47 (1994), 375–376.
[22] W. Ryan and A. Banks, A failure mechanism of Leeds–Keio ligaments, Injury 25 (1994), 443–445.
[23] H. Li, Z. Yao, J. Jiang, Y. Hua, J. Chen, Y. Li et al., Biologic failure of a ligament advanced reinforcement system arti-
ficial ligament in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a report of serious knee synovitis, Arthroscopy 28(4) (2012),
583–586.
[24] R. Jingrun, W. Jin, S. Hong and H. Nan, Surface modification of polyethylene terephthalate with albumin and gelatin for
improvement of anticoagulation and endothelialization, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255 (2008), 263–266.
[25] V.B. Duthon, C. Barea, S. Abrassart, J.H. Fasel, D. Fritschy and J. Ménétrey, Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament,
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 14 (2006), 204–213.
[26] T. Brune, A. Borel, T. Gilbert, JP F, S. Badylak and P. Sommer, In vitro comparison of human fibroblasts from intact and
ruptured ACL for use in tissue engineering, Eur. Cell Mater. 14 (2007), 78–90.
[27] K.G. Danielson, H. Baribault, D.F. Holmes, H. Graham, K.E. Kadler and R.V. Iozzo, Targeted disruption of decorin leads
to abnormal collagen fibril morphology and skin fragility, J. Cell Biol. 136 (1997), 729–743.
[28] L. Häkkinen, S. Strassburger, V.-M. Kähäri, G.P. Scott, I. Eichstetter, V.R. Iozzo et al., A role for decorin in the structural
organization of periodontal ligament, Lab. Invest. 80 (2000), 1869–1880.
[29] D. Knee, JD SA, Decorin binds near the C terminus of type I collagen, Journal of Biological Chemistry 275(29) (2000),
21801–21804.
[30] V. Viateau, J. Zhou, S. Guérard, M. Manassero, M. Thourot, F. Anagnostou, D. Mitton, B. Brulez and V. Migonney, Lig-
art: ligament synthétique «bioactif» et «biointégrable» permettant la réhabilitation rapide du patient: greffage chimique,
évaluations biologiques in vivo, expérimentation animale, étude préclinique, IRBM 32(2) (2011), 118–122.