4.1 Article

A three-dimensional in vitro model system to study the adaptation of craniofacial skeletal muscle following mechanostimulation

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES
Volume 113, Issue 3, Pages 218-224

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00215.x

Keywords

extracellular matrix; mechanostimulation; remodelling; skeletal muscle; matrix-metalloproteinases 2 and 9

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the in vitro response of human craniofacial muscle-derived myotubes (primitive/nascent muscle fibres), in three-dimensional constructs, to strain in vitro to mimic clinical scenarios, using expression of the mechanoresponsive gene gelatinase-A/matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) as a marker of remodelling of muscle extracellular matrix. Three-dimensional (3D) constructs of cells derived from explants of human masseter muscle (human craniofacial muscle-derived cells; hCMDC) in collagen sponges were subjected to mechanical, uniaxial strain using the Bio-Stretch system. 3D myotube constructs were exposed to the strain regimes of rapid ramp stretch (RRS) or cyclical ramp strain (CRS) with 7.5% and 15% strain. The activity of MMP-2 was assessed by zymography of construct-conditioned medium, whilst lysates of the constructs were used to measure creatine phosphokinase (CPK) activity to confirm the presence of myotubes in the strained constructs. Scanning electron microscopy of the collagen sponges and the CPK assays confirmed the presence of myotubes. MMP-2 was expressed by all the samples and controls, but expression was found to be significantly higher in those cultures strained continuously (RRS), compared to cyclical strain (CRS), and in those strained at 15% compared to 7.5%. Thus, MMP-2 expression, and hence extracellular matrix remodelling, is up-regulated in response to strain and is dependent upon the amount and type of strain to which the muscle is subjected.

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