4.8 Article

A translational approach in using cell sheet fragments of autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells for cellular cardiomyoplasty in a porcine model

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 34, 期 19, 页码 4582-4591

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.03.003

关键词

Translational medicine; Cell-based therapy; Myocardial infarction; Cardiac tissue regeneration; Arrhythmia

资金

  1. National Science Council [NSC 99-2628-B-075A-001-MY3, NSC 101-2221-E-075A-001-MY3]
  2. National Health Research Institute, Taiwan [NHRI-EX101-10138EI]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on a porcine model with surgically created myocardial infarction (MI) as a pre-clinical scheme, this study investigates the clinical translation of cell sheet fragments of autologous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for cellular cardiomyoplasty. MSC sheet fragments retaining endogenous extracellular matrices are fabricated using a thermo-responsive methylcellulose hydrogel system. Echocardiographic observations indicate that transplantation of MSC sheet fragments in infarcted hearts can markedly attenuate the adverse ventricular dilation and preserve the cardiac function post MI, which is in contrast to the controlled groups receiving saline or dissociated MSCs. Additionally, histological analyses suggest that administering MSC sheet fragments significantly prevents the scar expansion and left ventricle remodeling after MI. Immunohistochemistry results demonstrate that the engrafted MSCs can differentiate into endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells, implying that angiogenesis and the subsequent regional perfusion improvement is a promising mechanism for ameliorating post-infarcted cardiac function. However, according to the data recorded by an implantable loop recorder, the transplanted MSCs may provoke arrhythmia. Nevertheless, the proposed approach may potentially lead to the eventual translation of MSC-based therapy into practical and effective clinical treatments. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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