4.5 Article

Anterior cruciate ligament regeneration using mesenchymal stem cells and collagen type I scaffold in a rabbit model

Journal

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
Volume 22, Issue 5, Pages 1196-1202

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2471-6

Keywords

Anterior cruciate ligament; Mesenchymal stem cells; Collagen type I scaffold; Regeneration; Tissue engineering

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to determine whether using mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) seeded in a collagen type I scaffold would be sufficient to regenerate the torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Anterior cruciate ligament transection was performed on both knees in 10 New Zealand rabbits and then repaired with as follows: suture alone (suture-treated group, n = 6), suture associated with collagen type I scaffold (collagen type I scaffold-treated group, n = 8) or suture associated with autologous MSC seeded on collagen type I scaffold (MSC/collagen type I scaffold-treated group, n = 6). At 12-week post-intervention, the animals were killed and the ACLs were characterised macroscopically and histologically. Data of the 3 groups were against normal ACL (normal group, n = 10). Macroscopic observation found that in MSC/collagen type I scaffold group, 33 % of specimens showed a complete ACL regeneration, with a tissue similar to the normal ACL. Regeneration was not observed in the group treated with suture alone or associated with collagen type I scaffold without cells. In the latter, only a reparative attempt at the ends was observed. Histological analysis of the regenerated ACL showed a tissue with organised collagen and peripheric vessels. These results provide evidence that the use of MSC seeded in a collagen type I scaffold in the treatment of ACL injuries is associated with an enhancement of ligament regeneration. This MSC-based technique is a potentially attractive tool for improving the treatment of ACL ruptures.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available