4.6 Article

Xenogeneic Acellular Conjunctiva Matrix as a Scaffold of Tissue-Engineered Corneal Epithelium

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111846

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB967004]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2006AA02A132]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Amniotic membrane-based tissue-engineered corneal epithelium has been widely used in the reconstruction of the ocular surface. However, it often degrades too early to ensure the success of the transplanted corneal epithelium when treating patients with severe ocular surface disorders. In the present study, we investigated the preparation of xenogeneic acellular conjunctiva matrix (aCM) and evaluated its efficacy and safety as a scaffold of tissue-engineered corneal epithelium. Native porcine conjunctiva was decellularized with 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) for 12 h at 37 degrees C and sterilized via gamma-cirradiation. Compared with native conjunctiva, more than 92% of the DNA was removed, and more than 90% of the extracellular matrix components (glycosaminoglycan and collagen) remained after the decellularization treatment. Compared with denuded amniotic membrane (dAM), the aCM possessed favorable optical transmittance, tensile strength, stability and biocompatibility as well as stronger resistance to degradation both in vitro and in vivo. The corneal epithelial cells seeded on aCM formed a multilayered epithelial structure and endured longer than did those on dAM. The aCM-based tissue-engineered corneal epithelium was more effective in the reconstruction of the ocular surface in rabbits with limbal stem cell deficiency. These findings support the application of xenogeneic acellular conjunctiva matrix as a scaffold for reconstructing the ocular surface.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available