4.8 Article

A prototype tissue engineered blood vessel using amniotic membrane as scaffold

Journal

ACTA BIOMATERIALIA
Volume 8, Issue 9, Pages 3342-3348

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.05.012

Keywords

Amniotic membrane; Tissue engineering; Junctional molecules; Integrins; Blood vessel

Funding

  1. National Science Council, Taiwan, Republic of China [NSC-96-2745-B-029-001-URD]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we used amniotic membrane (AM), a natural extracellular matrix, as a scaffold for the fabrication of tissue engineered blood vessels (TEBVs). The inner surface of the denuded glutaraldehyde cross-linked AM tube was endothelialized with porcine vascular endothelial cells (ECs) and subjected to a physiological (12 dyne cm(-2)) shear stress (SS) for 2 and 4 days. The results showed that after applying SS, an intact EC monolayer was maintained in the lumen surface of the TEBV. The ECs were aligned with their long axis parallel to the blood flow. The immunofluorescent microscopy showed that the intercellular junctional proteins, PECAM-1 and VE-cadherin, were surrounding the EC periphery and were better developed and more abundant in SS-treated TEBVs than the static controls. The Western blot indicated that the expressions of PECAM-1 and VE-cadherin were increased by 72 +/- 9% and 67 +/- 7%, respectively, after shear stress treatment. The distribution pattern of integrin beta 1 was mainly at the interface of ECs and AM in static TEBVs but it was extended to the cell-cell junctions after SS treatment. The SS promoted the expression of integrin alpha(v)beta(3) without altering its distribution in TEBV. The results suggest that glutaraldehyde cross-linked AM tube can potentially be used as a scaffold biomaterial for TEBV fabrication. Most importantly, the use of an AM tube shortened the TEBV fabrication. (C) 2012 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by 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