Bioengineering Program, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA.
Ann Biomed Eng. 2013 Mar;41(3):446-68. doi: 10.1007/s10439-012-0678-1. Epub 2012 Oct 26.
The integration of gene therapy into tissue engineering to control differentiation and direct tissue formation is not a new concept; however, successful delivery of nucleic acids into primary cells, progenitor cells, and stem cells has proven exceptionally challenging. Viral vectors are generally highly effective at delivering nucleic acids to a variety of cell populations, both dividing and non-dividing, yet these viral vectors are marred by significant safety concerns. Non-viral vectors are preferred for gene therapy, despite lower transfection efficiencies, and possess many customizable attributes that are desirable for tissue engineering applications. However, there is no single non-viral gene delivery strategy that "fits-all" cell types and tissues. Thus, there is a compelling opportunity to examine different non-viral vectors, especially physical vectors, and compare their relative degrees of success. This review examines the advantages and disadvantages of physical non-viral methods (i.e., microinjection, ballistic gene delivery, electroporation, sonoporation, laser irradiation, magnetofection, and electric field-induced molecular vibration), with particular attention given to electroporation because of its versatility, with further special emphasis on Nucleofection™. In addition, attributes of cellular character that can be used to improve differentiation strategies are examined for tissue engineering applications. Ultimately, electroporation exhibits a high transfection efficiency in many cell types, which is highly desirable for tissue engineering applications, but electroporation and other physical non-viral gene delivery methods are still limited by poor cell viability. Overcoming the challenge of poor cell viability in highly efficient physical non-viral techniques is the key to using gene delivery to enhance tissue engineering applications.
将基因治疗与组织工程相结合以控制分化并指导组织形成并不是一个新概念;然而,成功地将核酸递送至原代细胞、祖细胞和干细胞一直极具挑战性。病毒载体通常在将核酸递送至各种细胞群(包括分裂和非分裂细胞)方面非常有效,但这些病毒载体存在严重的安全问题。非病毒载体更适合基因治疗,尽管转染效率较低,但具有许多组织工程应用所需的可定制属性。然而,没有一种单一的非病毒基因传递策略适用于所有细胞类型和组织。因此,有必要检查不同的非病毒载体,特别是物理载体,并比较它们相对的成功程度。本综述考察了物理非病毒方法(即微注射、弹道基因传递、电穿孔、声穿孔、激光辐照、磁转染和电场诱导分子振动)的优缺点,特别关注电穿孔,因为其多功能性,进一步特别强调 NucleofectionTM。此外,还研究了可用于改善组织工程应用中分化策略的细胞特性属性。最终,电穿孔在许多细胞类型中表现出高转染效率,这对于组织工程应用非常理想,但电穿孔和其他物理非病毒基因传递方法仍然受到细胞活力差的限制。克服高效物理非病毒技术中细胞活力差的挑战是利用基因传递来增强组织工程应用的关键。