Comparative Structural and Functional Analysis of Micronized Collagen-Based Scaffolds

Micronized collagen-based bioscaffolds are increasingly used in clinical applications for wound repair and soft tissue regeneration. This study compared the structural properties of four different commercially available micronized products derived from either reconstituted collagen (pRC), urinary bladder matrix (pUBM), or ovine forestomach matrix (mOFM, mOFMµ). The test articles were characterized by laser diffraction analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), packing density, differential scanning calorimetry, rheometry, proteolytic stability, agarose gel electrophoresis, and blood clotting index. Particle size and surface morphology, assessed by laser diffraction, SEM, and micro-CT, revealed marked differences in particle size, shape, and aggregation. Packing density ranged from 80.3 ± 2.7 mg/cm<sup>3</sup> (mOFM) to 484.7 ± 17.8 mg/cm<sup>3</sup> (pRC). Thermal analysis demonstrated the native structure of the OFM-based test articles (T<sub>m</sub>, 59.80 ± 0.11°C and 58.15 ± 0.15°C) relative to pUBM and pRC (T<sub>m</sub>, 41.06 ± 0.06°C and 40.59 ± 0.23°C). Rheological testing revealed that mOFM and mOFMµ had increased cohesive energy, indicating better mechanical resilience when the micronized materials were rehydrated to form a paste. The OFM-based test articles exhibited the greatest resistance to proteolytic digestion (T<sub>1/2</sub>, 12.730 ± 1.232 and 5.759 ± 0.1296). All the test articles, except for the reconstituted collagen product, demonstrated hemostasis in whole blood. Micronized reconstituted collagen showed immediate dissolution and no fluid absorption, hemostasis, or resistance to proteolytic digestion, whereas micronized OFM showed the greatest proteolytic stability and packing density. Substantial differences among the micronized bioscaffolds were revealed from the analysis, most likely due to their different source materials and manufacturing processes. Careful consideration of these parameters is warranted when selecting a micronized product for soft tissue applications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Tissue Engineering Part A
Published
2025-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/19373341251396168
Primary Topic
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Structural and Functional Analysis of Micronized Collagen-Based Scaffolds

Barnaby C. H. May, Subhajit Konar, Dane Gerneke, Isaac Mason et al.
Tissue Engineering Part A
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
article

Comparative Structural and Functional Analysis of Micronized Collagen-Based Scaffolds

Barnaby C. H. May, Subhajit Konar, Dane Gerneke, Isaac Mason, Alexander T. Wilson, Robert W.F. Veale, Navid Taghavi, Matthew James Smith, Sandi G. Dempsey, Ameera Danford, Yohanes Nursalim, Hanting Yong, Xavier Yates
article en

Abstract

Micronized collagen-based bioscaffolds are increasingly used in clinical applications for wound repair and soft tissue regeneration. This study compared the structural properties of four different commercially available micronized products derived from either reconstituted collagen (pRC), urinary bladder matrix (pUBM), or ovine forestomach matrix (mOFM, mOFMµ). The test articles were characterized by laser diffraction analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), packing density, differential scanning calorimetry, rheometry, proteolytic stability, agarose gel electrophoresis, and blood clotting index. Particle size and surface morphology, assessed by laser diffraction, SEM, and micro-CT, revealed marked differences in particle size, shape, and aggregation. Packing density ranged from 80.3 ± 2.7 mg/cm<sup>3</sup> (mOFM) to 484.7 ± 17.8 mg/cm<sup>3</sup> (pRC). Thermal analysis demonstrated the native structure of the OFM-based test articles (T<sub>m</sub>, 59.80 ± 0.11°C and 58.15 ± 0.15°C) relative to pUBM and pRC (T<sub>m</sub>, 41.06 ± 0.06°C and 40.59 ± 0.23°C). Rheological testing revealed that mOFM and mOFMµ had increased cohesive energy, indicating better mechanical resilience when the micronized materials were rehydrated to form a paste. The OFM-based test articles exhibited the greatest resistance to proteolytic digestion (T<sub>1/2</sub>, 12.730 ± 1.232 and 5.759 ± 0.1296). All the test articles, except for the reconstituted collagen product, demonstrated hemostasis in whole blood. Micronized reconstituted collagen showed immediate dissolution and no fluid absorption, hemostasis, or resistance to proteolytic digestion, whereas micronized OFM showed the greatest proteolytic stability and packing density. Substantial differences among the micronized bioscaffolds were revealed from the analysis, most likely due to their different source materials and manufacturing processes. Careful consideration of these parameters is warranted when selecting a micronized product for soft tissue applications.

Tissue Engineering Part A
University of Auckland (NZ)
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.