4.7 Article

Functional Evaluation of Two Corneal Endothelial Cell-Based Therapies: Tissue-Engineered Construct and Cell Injection

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-42493-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation Translational and Clinical Research (TCR) Programme [NMRC/TCR/008-SERI/2013]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Restoration of vision due to corneal blindness from corneal endothelial dysfunction can be achieved via a corneal transplantation. However, global shortage of donor tissues has driven the development cell-based therapeutics. With the capacity to propagate regulatory compliant human corneal endothelial cells (CEnCs), this study evaluated the functionality of propagated CEnCs delivered via tissue-engineered endothelial keratoplasty (TE-EK) or corneal endothelial cell injection (CE-CI) within a rabbit model of bullous keratopathy. For animals with TE-EK grafts, central corneal thickness (CCT) increased to >1000 mu m post-operatively. Gradual thinning with improvements in corneal clarity was observed from week 1. CCT at week 3 was 484.3 +/- 73.7 mu m. In rabbits with CE-CI, corneal clarity was maintained throughout, and CCT at week 3 was 582.5 +/- 171.5 mu m. Control corneas remained significantly edematous throughout the study period compared to their respective experimental groups (p < 0.05). Characterization of excised corneas showed a monolayer with heterogeneously shaped CEnCs in both TE-EK and CE-CI groups. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated reactivity to anti-human specific nuclei antibody attributing corneal recovery to the functional human CEnCs. This study showed that regulatory compliant cell-based therapy for corneal endothelial dysfunction can be delivered by both TE-EK and CE-CI, and holds great promise as an alternative to traditional corneal transplantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available