4.8 Article

The use of phospholipase A2 to prepare acellular porcine corneal stroma as a tissue engineering scaffold

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 30, Issue 21, Pages 3513-3522

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.03.003

Keywords

Corneal tissue engineering; Scaffold; Phospholipase A(2); Sodium deoxycholate; Decellularization

Funding

  1. National Key Technologies Research and Development Program of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan of China [2006AA02A133]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was to develop a method using phospholipase A(2) (PLA(2)) to prepare acellular porcine corneal stroma (APCS) for tissue engineering. The APCS was prepared from native porcine cornea (NPC) that was treated with 200 U/ml PLA(2) and 0.5% sodium deoxycholate (SD). The removal of DNA content, representing decellularization efficiency, reached to 91%, while all hydroxyproline and 80% of glycosaminoglycan were retained in the APCS when compared with NPC. The residual PLA(2) and SD were 0.35 0.04 U/mg dry weight and 4.3 +/- 0.8 ng/mg dry weight respectively. The extracts of APCS had no inhibitory effects on proliferation of corneal epithelial and endothelial cells as well as keratocytes. There was no sign of infiltration of neutrophilic leukocytes or leukomonocytes at 2 weeks after subcutaneous implantation of APCS. The prepared APCS displayed similar light transmittance to NPC. There were no significant differences in the areal modulus and curvature variation between APCS and NPC. Rabbit lamellar keratoplasty showed that the grafts of APCS were epithelialized completely in 8 +/- 2 days, and their transparency was restored in 84 +/- 11 days when the light transmittance of APCS-transplanted corneas displayed no significant difference compared with native corneas. Corneal neovascularization, corneal deformation, and graft degradation were not observed within 12 months. (C) 2009 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