Moral imagination in tissue engineering research on animal models

Tissue engineering in pediatric urology - a critical appraisal

Tissue engineering is defined as the combination of biomaterials and bioengineering principles together with cell transplantation or directed growth of host cells to develop a biological replacement tissue or organ that can be a substitute for normal tissue both in structure and function. Despite early promising preclinical studies, clinical translation of tissue engineering in pediatric urology into humans has been unsuccessful both for cell-seeded and acellular scaffolds. This can be ascribed to various factors, including the use of only non-diseased models that inaccurately describe the structural and functional modifications of diseased tissue. The paper addresses potential future strategies to overcome the limitations experienced in clinical applications so far. This includes the use of stem cells of various origins (mesenchymal stem cells, hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells, urine-derived stem cells, and progenitor cells of the urothelium) as well as the need for a deeper understanding of signaling pathways and directing tissue ingrowth and differentiation through the concept of dynamic reciprocity. The development of smart scaffolds that release trophic factors in a set and timely manner will probably improve regeneration. Modulation of innate immune response as a major contributor to tissue regeneration outcome is also addressed. It is unlikely that only one of these strategies alone will lead to clinically applicable tissue engineering strategies in pediatric urology. In the meanwhile, the fundamental new insights into regenerative processes already obtained in the attempts of tissue engineering of the lower urogenital tract remain our greatest gain.

* Ethical Issues in the Use of Animal Models for Tissue Engineering: Reflections on Legal Aspects, Moral Theory, Three Rs Strategies, and Harm-Benefit Analysis

Animal experimentation requires a solid and rational moral foundation. Objective and emphatic decision-making and protocol evaluation by researchers and ethics committees remain a difficult and sensitive matter. This article presents three perspectives that facilitate a consideration of the minimally acceptable standard for animal experiments, in particular, in tissue engineering (TE) and regenerative medicine. First, we review the boundaries provided by law and public opinion in America and Europe. Second, we review contemporary moral theory to introduce the Neo-Rawlsian contractarian theory to objectively evaluate the ethics of animal experiments. Third, we introduce the importance of available reduction, replacement, and refinement strategies, which should be accounted for in moral decision-making and protocol evaluation of animal experiments. The three perspectives are integrated into an algorithmic and graphic harm-benefit analysis tool based on the most relevant aspects of animal models in TE. We conclude with a consideration of future avenues to improve animal experiments.

Tissue engineering in animal models for urinary diversion: a systematic review

Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM) approaches may provide alternatives for gastrointestinal tissue in urinary diversion. To continue to clinically translatable studies, TERM alternatives need to be evaluated in (large) controlled and standardized animal studies. Here, we investigated all evidence for the efficacy of tissue engineered constructs in animal models for urinary diversion. Studies investigating this subject were identified through a systematic search of three different databases (PubMed, Embase and Web of Science). From each study, animal characteristics, study characteristics and experimental outcomes for meta-analyses were tabulated. Furthermore, the reporting of items vital for study replication was assessed. The retrieved studies (8 in total) showed extreme heterogeneity in study design, including animal models, biomaterials and type of urinary diversion. All studies were feasibility studies, indicating the novelty of this field. None of the studies included appropriate control groups, i.e. a comparison with the classical treatment using GI tissue. The meta-analysis showed a trend towards successful experimentation in larger animals although no specific animal species could be identified as the most suitable model. Larger animals appear to allow a better translation to the human situation, with respect to anatomy and surgical approaches. It was unclear whether the use of cells benefits the formation of a neo urinary conduit. The reporting of the methodology and data according to standardized guidelines was insufficient and should be improved to increase the value of such publications. In conclusion, animal models in the field of TERM for urinary diversion have probably been chosen for reasons other than their predictive value. Controlled and comparative long term animal studies, with adequate methodological reporting are needed to proceed to clinical translatable studies. This will aid in good quality research with the reduction in the use of animals and an increase in empirical evidence of biomedical research.

Establishment of a bilateral femoral large segmental bone defect mouse model potentially applicable to basic research in bone tissue engineering

BACKGROUND

To understand the cellular mechanism underlying bone defect healing in the context of tissue engineering, a reliable, reproducible, and standardized load-bearing large segmental bone defect model in small animals is indispensable. The aim of this study was to establish and evaluate a bilateral femoral defect model in mice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donor mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (mBMSCs) were obtained from six mice (FVB/N) and incorporated into partially demineralized bone matrix scaffolds to construct tissue-engineered bones. In total, 36 GFP(+) mice were used for modeling. Titanium fixation plates with locking steel wires were attached to the femurs for stabilization, and 2-mm-long segmental bone defects were created in the bilateral femoral midshafts. The defects in the left and right femurs were transplanted with tissue-engineered bones and control scaffolds, respectively. The healing process was monitored by x-ray radiography, microcomputed tomography, and histology. The capacity of the transplanted mBMSCs to recruit host CD31(+) cells was investigated by immunofluorescence and real-time polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, no complication was observed, except that two mice died of unknown causes. Stable fixation of femurs and implants with full load bearing was achieved in all animals. The process of bone defect repair was significantly accelerated due to the introduction of mBMSCs. Moreover, the transplanted mBMSCs attracted more host CD31(+) endothelial progenitors into the grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study established a feasible, reproducible, and clinically relevant bilateral femoral large segmental bone defect mouse model. This model is potentially suitable for basic research in the field of bone tissue engineering.

The potential of tissue engineering for developing alternatives to animal experiments: a systematic review

An underexposed ethical issue raised by tissue engineering is the use of laboratory animals in tissue engineering research. Even though this research results in suffering and loss of life in animals, tissue engineering also has great potential for the development of alternatives to animal experiments. With the objective of promoting a joint effort of tissue engineers and alternative experts to fully realise this potential, this study provides the first comprehensive overview of the possibilities of using tissue-engineered constructs as a replacement of laboratory animals. Through searches in two large biomedical databases (PubMed, Embase) and several specialised 3R databases, 244 relevant primary scientific articles, published between 1991 and 2011, were identified. By far most articles reviewed related to the use of tissue-engineered skin/epidermis for toxicological applications such as testing for skin irritation. This review article demonstrates, however, that the potential for the development of alternatives also extends to other tissues such as other epithelia and the liver, as well as to other fields of application such as drug screening and basic physiology. This review discusses which impediments need to be overcome to maximise the contributions that the field of tissue engineering can make, through the development of alternative methods, to the reduction of the use and suffering of laboratory animals.

A systematic review of animal models used to study nerve regeneration in tissue-engineered scaffolds

Research on biomaterial nerve scaffolds has been carried out for 50 years. Only three materials (collagen, polycaprolactone and polyglycollic acid) have progressed to clinical use. Pre-clinical animal models are critical for testing nerve scaffolds prior to implementation in clinical practice. We have conducted a systematic review of 416 reports in which animal models were used for evaluation of nerve regeneration into synthetic conduits. A valid animal model of nerve regeneration requires it to reproduce the specific processes that take place in regeneration after human peripheral nerve injury. No distinct animal species meets all the requirements for an ideal animal model. Certain models are well suited for understanding regenerative neurobiology while others are better for pre-clinical evaluation of efficacy. The review identified that more than 70 synthetic materials were tested in eight species using 17 different nerves. Nerve gaps ranged from 1 to 90 mm. More than 20 types of assessment methodology were used with no standardization of methods between any of the publications. The review emphasizes the urgent need for standardization or rationalization of animal models and evaluation methods for studying nerve repair.

Reducing the number of laboratory animals used in tissue engineering research by restricting the variety of animal models. Articular cartilage tissue engineering as a case study

The use of laboratory animals in tissue engineering research is an important underexposed ethical issue. Several ethical questions may be raised about this use of animals. This article focuses on the possibilities of reducing the number of animals used. Given that there is considerable debate about the adequacy of the current animal models in tissue engineering research, we investigate whether it is possible to reduce the number of laboratory animals by selecting and using only those models that have greatest predictive value for future clinical application of the tissue engineered product. The field of articular cartilage tissue engineering is used as a case study. Based on a study of the scientific literature and interviews with leading experts in the field, an overview is provided of the animal models used and the advantages and disadvantages of each model, particularly in terms of extrapolation to the human situation. Starting from this overview, it is shown that, by skipping the small models and using only one large preclinical model, it is indeed possible to restrict the number of animal models, thereby reducing the number of laboratory animals used. Moreover, it is argued that the selection of animal models should become more evidence based and that researchers should seize more opportunities to choose or create characteristics in the animal models that increase their predictive value.

Ethical aspects of tissue engineering: a review

Tissue engineering (TE) is a promising new field of medical technology. However, like other new technologies, it is not free of ethical challenges. Identifying these ethical questions at an early stage is not only part of science's responsibility toward society, but also in the interest of the field itself. In this review, we map which ethical issues related to TE have already been documented in the scientific literature. The issues that turn out to dominate the debate are the use of human embryonic stem cells and therapeutic cloning. Nevertheless, a variety of other ethical aspects are mentioned, which relate to different phases in the development of the field. In addition, we discuss a number of ethical issues that have not yet been raised in the literature.