China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
A Strategy for Regeneration of Three-Dimensional (3D) Microtissues in Microcapsules: Aerosol Atomization Technique
Published in Naznin Sultana, Sanchita Bandyopadhyay-Ghosh, Chin Fhong Soon, Tissue Engineering Strategies for Organ Regeneration, 2020
Chin Fhong Soon, Wai Yean Leong, Kian Sek Tee, Mohd Khairul Ahmad, Nafarizal Nayan
Culturing monolayers of cells in plastic dishes is routinely performed in life sciences and cell biological studies. Currently, scientific committee has begun to realize the many limitations of monolayer or two-dimensional (2D) culture model (Antoni et al. 2015, Souza et al. 2010). 2D cell model is missing accurate representation of physiological origins in terms of the proliferation, differentiation, gene and protein expression, functionality and morphology of cells (Edmondson et al. 2014). Contrarily, the three-dimensional (3D) cell culture creates extracellular matrix where cells are permitted to grow or interact with its surroundings. 3D cell culture regenerates biological relevant tissue model that restores specific cellular activities, signaling molecules and morphological structures similar to those in vivo (Kunz-Schughart et al. 2004). The cell interactions, responses and organization occurring within a 3D context demonstrated more native like and the severe limitations of 2D culture (Edmondson et al. 2014, Soon et al. 2016). 3D cell culture is part of the effort in regenerative medicine or biotechnology to recreate living and functional tissues in vitro, in which they are needed for replacement of damaged tissues (Kang et al. 2014), cancer research, application in tissue engineering (Stevens et al. 2004), pharmacological testing and stem cell research (Sugiura et al. 2005). Microencapsulation is an intensive research area to create cell and tissue model for rehabilitation of functional tissues (Zhao et al. 2017) and therapeutics purpose (da Rocha et al. 2014, Shin et al. 2013).
Magnetic Nanoparticles for 3D Cell Culture
Published in Jon Dobson, Carlos Rinaldi, Nanomagnetic Actuation in Biomedicine, 2018
Hubert Tseng, Robert M. Raphael, Thomas C. Killian, Glauco R. Souza
The use of magnetic nanoparticles and fields for 3D cell culture holds several advantages over existing models for biomedical research (Figure 10.1). In a broader context, 3D cell culture is more representative of native tissue, and thus more predictive of human in vivo response, than traditionally used two-dimensional (2D) models.20 Whereas cells in 2D are cultured on stiff plastic or glass substrates not found within the body, cells in 3D grow in a soft environment, either artificial or endogenously grown, that mimics the dimensionality, ECM, and cell–cell and cell–ECM interactions that exist in native tissue.21–26 Moreover, cells in 2D are uniformly exposed to nutrients/biochemical factors in the media above it, while the exposure of cells in 3D varies based on its position within the structure and the composition of the surrounding ECM, making it less sensitive to compounds and exogenous factors and mimicking in vivo situations.27,28 As a result, biomedical research is quickly gravitating toward 3D cell culture models that faithfully represent the native tissue.
Confocal Raman microscopy
Published in Raquel Seruca, Jasjit S. Suri, João M. Sanches, Fluorescence Imaging and Biological Quantification, 2017
M. Gomez-Lazaro, A. Freitas, C.C. Ribeiro
Although traditionally 2D cell cultures have been used to gain an insight into cellular physiology and behavior prior to in vivo trials, 3D cell cultures are now accepted as better predictors [26]. By using 3D cultures that recapitulate the heterogeneity of avascular tumors (organoids), it was shown that it is possible to define differentiated spatial regions within the organoids with Raman spectroscopy [27]. The necrotic core displayed higher autofluorescence, whereas higher protein and peptides bands were localized away from this core. Ahlf and coworkers also took advantage of confocal Raman microscope and were able to define three distinct regions within the organoids: (1) a proliferative outer region, (2) a necrotic core, and (3) a transition intermediate zone. In the field of regenerative therapies, confocal Raman microscopy has also been successfully used in the study of the extracellular matrix deposition in bioengineered scaffolds developed by Kunstar and coworkers [28]. The Raman bands at 937 and 1062 cm−1, which correspond to collagen and sulphated glycosaminoglycans were used to monitor the extracellular matrix formed by the cells growing in these scaffolds.
Evaluation of the proinflammatory effects of contaminated bathing water
Published in Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 2019
Anas A. Sattar, Wondwossen Abate, Gyorgy Fejer, Graham Bradley, Simon K. Jackson
Cell culture models have been used since their establishment early in the last century to screen for health risks and toxicity of drugs or chemicals (Abate et al. 2017; Bradlaw 1986). Bioassay methods were designed to assess the influence of titanium dioxide (TiO2) which is present in various commonly used products (Zhu, Eaton, and Li 2012). Various cell lines are also being used now to test the inflammatory actions of pharmaceutical products and drug discovery (Bailey, Bryla, and Malick 1996; Behrens et al. 2001). Cell cultures were employed to determine the potential adverse health effects of bioaerosols (Liu et al. 2011) and cell culture methods are also rapidly developing and replacing conventional in vivo studies in experimental animals (Mazzoleni, Di Lorenzo, and Steimberg 2009). In addition, 3D cell culture techniques are rapidly developing as an alternative in vitro assessment of chemical toxicity of environmental samples and drug screening (Baron et al. 2012; Ramos et al. 2019). However, no apparent studies investigated the potential adverse health effects of contaminated marine bathing waters.
Hydroxyapatite incorporated bacterial cellulose hydrogels as a cost-effective 3D cell culture platform
Published in Soft Materials, 2022
Sandya Shiranthi Athukorala, Chathudina J. Liyanage, Anil C. A. Jayasundera
Scientists have long relied on 2D cell cultures grown on plates to examine cellular and disease processes, as 2D cell-culture models are easy and inexpensive to develop and process.[1] However, these conventional 2D culture systems have many limitations, such as the lack of cell–cell and cell–ECM interactions and variations in cell morphology, polarity, and cell division. 3D cell cultures have, therefore, become increasingly common over the last decade as they are more physiologically important and better represent in vivo tissue. As an example, there are no cell types in our body that develop as monolayers independent of other cells or tissues. Instead, most cells naturally reside in complex 3D systems, including various types of cells inside an ECM. Different forms of cell–cell and cell–matrix interactions have a profound impact on their behavior. 2D cell monolayers have a standardized access to nutrients, which is not the case in cell masses, such as tumors. In tumors, internal cells have fewer nutrients than external cells, which form a naturally occurring gradient.[2] This contrariety is known to be a significant contributor to the high rate of drug failure. For this purpose, scientists have been widely researching effective methods for the development of models capable of imitating in vivo conditions. In vitro three-dimensional (3D) cell-culture models offer a more precise intermediate platform between simplified 2D culture models and complex and expensive in vivo models.[3] 3D cell culture is a well-known environment that has artificially been developed. Here, in all three dimensions, biological cells can grow or interact with tissue surroundings and with each other. 3D cultures permit the formation of concentration gradients, including oxygen, metabolites, and growth factors.