4.0 Article

Evaluation of regenerated tracheal cilia function on a collagen-conjugated scaffold in a canine model

Journal

INTERACTIVE CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 31, Issue 5, Pages 644-649

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivaa167

Keywords

Artificial trachea; Regenerated cilia; Ciliary beat frequency; Ciliary transport functions

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES: It is unclear whether the movement and function of the regenerated cilia on collagen-conjugated artificial trachea are the same as those of normal cilia. This study assessed the ciliary beat frequency (CBF) and ciliary transport functions (CTFs) of regenerated cilia in a canine model. METHODS: A tracheal defect introduced into the anterior portion of the cervical trachea of an adult beagle dog was covered with a collagen-conjugated prosthesis. Two months later, the trachea was harvested along the long axis, both from normal and regenerated regions. The cilia were stained with isothiocyanate-conjugated wheat germ agglutinin, and their movement was monitored with a high-speed camera to analyse CBF and CTF. Four samples each were obtained from the regenerated and normal regions for CBF analysis and 7 samples each were obtained for CTF analysis. RESULTS: The wheat germ agglutinin-stained cells showed well-regulated beats in both the regenerated and normal regions of the trachea. Mean CBF in the regenerated and normal regions did not differ significantly (7.11 +/- 0.41 vs 7.14 +/- 1.09 Hz; P = 981). By contrast, CTF was significantly lower in the regenerated region than in the normal region (30.0 +/- 6.62 vs 7.43 +/- 0.58 mu m/s; P= 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Mean CBF in the regenerated and normal regions did not differ significantly at 2 months. The CTF in the regenerated region recovered partially but remained lower than those in the normal region. Methods are needed to improve the CTF of regenerated cilia.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available