Table 2 In vitro models of IVD degeneration and low back pain
In vitro model | Culture method | Cells / tissues | Pros | Cons | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Monolayer culture | Various substrates (Polystyrene, PDMS) | All types of IVD derived cells (NP, AF, etc) | Simple to use, inexpensive, easy to manipulate cellular environment | Cells quickly lose in vivo morphology once seeded, lack of ECM and mechanical stimuli may affect cell behavior | |
Microfluidics | Tissue | Whole disc | Most representative of disc tissue, good for nutrient exchange and perfusion studies | Difficult to monitor inside of disc, often requires specialized equipment | |
Monolayer | Multi-cell type culture (ex: AF, NP, Neural, EC) | Ideal for cellular crosstalk studies, allowed for precise control of microenvironment | Susceptible to seeding effects and technical difficulties (ex: air bubbles), more expensive than traditional monolayer culture, often requires additional specialized equipment | ||
3D culture | Hydrogel | All types of IVD derived cells (NP, AF, etc) | Preserves 3D environment, supports native cell-matrix interactions | Requires specific culture conditions, longer-term viability limitations | |
Woven scaffold | AF, IA, NP | Provides scaffold-based culture system | May not fully replicate native disc matrix, cells may not fully integrate into scaffold system |
