4.5 Article

Effect of the combination of mesenchymal stromal cells and chondroitinase ABC on chronic spinal cord injury

期刊

CYTOTHERAPY
卷 17, 期 10, 页码 1374-1383

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2015.05.012

关键词

chondroitinase ABC; chronic spinal cord injury; dog; mesenchymal stromal cells

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2013RIA1A2004506]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transplantation of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) has been identified as a potential therapeutic modality for treating spinal cord injury (SCI). Degradation of chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs) using the enzyme chondroitinase ABC (chABC) can promote functional recovery after SCI. The effect of the simultaneous administration of MSCs and chABC on chronic SCI was investigated. Sixteen dogs were assigned to one of the following four groups: (i) canine adipose tissue-derived MSCs (cADMSCs), (ii) chABC, (iii) cADMSCs chABC and (iv) control. Treatments were carried out 3 weeks after SCI; cADMSCs (1 x 10(7) cells suspended in 150 mu L of PBS), chABC (5 U/mL, 150 ILL), cADMSCs chABC (1 x 107 cells suspended in 150 ill, of chABC), or phosphate-buffered saline (150 mu L) were injected into the spinal cord at three locations to a depth of 3 mm using a 30-gauge needle. The spinal cord was harvested 8 weeks after transplantation. In a behavioral assessment, dogs treated with cADMSCs chABC and cADMSCs alone showed significantly better functional recovery 8 weeks after transplantation compared with the control and chABC groups (P < 0.05). In addition, the combination of cADMSCs and chABC increased the expression of digested CSPGs (2B6), beta 3 tubulin, and NF-M. However, the levels of COX2 (P < 0.05), and tumor necrosis factor-a was higher in the treatment groups than in the control. In conclusion, transplantation of cADMSCs chABC was more effective in improving clinical signs and neural regeneration, but a strategy for anti-inflammation after the treatment for chronic SCI would be needed for further improvement.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据