4.8 Article

Biomimetic and synthetic esophageal tissue engineering

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 57, Issue -, Pages 133-141

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.04.004

Keywords

Tissue engineering; Esophagus; Bioreactor; Synthetic scaffold; Orthotopic implantation

Funding

  1. NFF [1126100]
  2. Connecticut Children's Medical Center Strategic Research Funding

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Purpose: A tissue-engineered esophagus offers an alternative for the treatment of pediatric patients suffering from severe esophageal malformations, caustic injury, and cancer. Additionally, adult patients suffering from carcinoma or trauma would benefit. Methods: Donor rat esophageal tissue was physically and enzymatically digested to isolate epithelial and smooth muscle tells, which were cultured in epithelial cell medium or smooth muscle cell medium and characterized by immunofluorescence. Isolated cells were also seeded onto electrospun synthetic PLGA and PCL/PLGA scaffolds in a physiologic hollow organ bioreactor. After 2 weeks of in vitro culture, tissue-engineered constructs were orthotopically transplanted. Results: Isolated cells were shown to give rise to epithelial, smooth muscle, and glial cell types. After 14 days in culture, scaffolds supported epithelial, smooth muscle and glial cell phenotypes. Transplanted constructs integrated into the host's native tissue and recipients of the engineered tissue demonstrated normal feeding habits. Characterization after 14 days of implantation revealed that all three cellular phenotypes were present in varying degrees in seeded and unseeded scaffolds. Conclusions: We demonstrate that isolated cells from native esophagus can be cultured and seeded onto electrospun scaffolds to create esophageal constructs. These constructs have potential translatable application for tissue engineering of human esophageal tissue. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available