4.1 Article

Regeneration of sciatic nerves by transplanted microvesicles of human neural stem cells derived from embryonic stem cells

Journal

CELL AND TISSUE BANKING
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 233-248

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10561-020-09816-5

Keywords

Embryonic stem cells; Neural stem cells; Microvesicles; Sciatic nerve; Injury repair

Funding

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81571221]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20151346]
  4. Qing Lan Project of Jiangsu Province

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Injured nerves cannot regenerate on their own, and a lack of engraftable human nerves has been a major obstacle in cell-based therapies for regenerating damaged nerves. A monolayer culture approach to obtain adherent neural stem cells from human embryonic stem cells (hESC-NSCs) was established, and the greatest number of stemness characteristics were achieved by the eighth generation of hESC-NSCs (P8 hESC-NSCs). To overcome deficits in cell therapy, we used microvesicles secreted from P8 hESC-NSCs (hESC-NSC-MVs) instead of entire hESC-NSCs. To investigate the therapeutic efficacy of hESC-NSC-MVs in vitro, hESC-NSC-MVs were cocultured with dorsal root ganglia to determine the length of axons. In vivo, we transected the sciatic nerve in SD rats and created a 5-mm gap. A sciatic nerve defect was bridged using a silicone tube filled with hESC-NSC-MVs (45 mu g) in the MVs group, P8 hESC-NSCs (1 x 10(6) single cells) in the cell group and PBS in the control group. The hESC-NSC-MVs group showed better morphological recovery and a significantly greater number of regenerated axons than the hESC-NSCs group 12 weeks after nerve injury. These results indicated that the hESC-NSC-MVs group had the greatest ability to repair and reconstruct nerve structure and function. As a result, hESC-NSC-MVs may have potential for applications in the field of nerve regenerative repair.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available