TABLE 2.
PCLS | Organoids | Lung ECM-derived hydrogels | Lung-on-chip |
Patient-to-patient variations | Heterogeneity in number and sizes (due to intra- and inter-patient variations and various culture modalities) | Patient-to-patient variations influencing ECM hydrogel properties | Challenges associated with incorporation of cells (only for closed lung-on-chip systems) |
Heterogeneity in the diseased regions, resulting in intra- and inter-slice differences | Closed architecture with limited access to the lumen, which is filled with liquid instead of air | Heterogeneity in the diseased regions and in decellularisation methods | Restriction of the morphogenesis to predefined geometry |
Absence of easy air–liquid interface setting | Presence of necrotic cores | Macroscopic architecture differing from native lung | Non-permissive environment that cannot be remodelled |
Need for fresh starting material that limits lifespan of various cells and the tissue in vitro | Difficult to obtain fully differentiated lung cell types | Pepsin removal currently not possible | Non-physiological stiffness of the device |
Snapshot of the cell populations in the tissue and absence of access to infiltrating cells | Lack of vascularisation and difficult to introduce perfusion or immune cells | Incorporation of cells is challenging | Challenges associated with translation of observations from microscale to in vivo systems |
Difficult to preserve arteriole morphology and function | Limited inclusion of mechanical forces associated with breathing | Limited inclusion of mechanical forces associated with breathing | For non-commercialised lung-on-chips: rather long production time of the microfluidic devices with a small throughput |
Cellular behaviour likely impacted by processing and agarose embedding | Limitations in hydrogel types to develop organoid culture systems | Lack of vascularisation and difficult to introduce perfusion |
PCLS: precision-cut lung slice; ECM: extracellular matrix.