4.7 Article

96 perfusable blood vessels to study vascular permeability in vitro

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14716-y

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. VIRGO consortium - Netherlands Genomics Initiative
  2. Dutch Government [FES0908]
  3. European Union's Horizon research and innovation program SysMedPD [668738]
  4. European Union's Horizon research and innovation program Adapted [115975]
  5. European Union [602783]
  6. Eurostars program HepaPlate [ESTAR16107]
  7. Netherlands Heart Foundation [2013T127]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current in vitro models to test the barrier function of vasculature are based on flat, two-dimensional monolayers. These monolayers do not have the tubular morphology of vasculature found in vivo and lack important environmental cues from the cellular microenvironment, such as interaction with an extracellular matrix (ECM) and exposure to flow. To increase the physiological relevance of in vitro models of the vasculature, it is crucial to implement these cues and better mimic the native three-dimensional vascular architecture. We established a robust, high-throughput method to culture endothelial cells as 96 three-dimensional and perfusable microvessels and developed a quantitative, real-time permeability assay to assess their barrier function. Culture conditions were optimized for microvessel formation in 7 days and were viable for over 60 days. The microvessels exhibited a permeability to 20 kDa dextran but not to 150 kDa dextran, which mimics the functionality of vasculature in vivo. Also, a dose-dependent effect of VEGF, TNF alpha and several cytokines confirmed a physiologically relevant response. The throughput and robustness of this method and assay will allow end-users in vascular biology to make the transition from two-dimensional to three-dimensional culture methods to study vasculature.

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