4.8 Article Publication with Expression of Concern

The first tissue-engineered airway transplantation: 5-year follow-up results (Publication with Expression of Concern. See vol. 401, 2023)

期刊

LANCET
卷 383, 期 9913, 页码 238-244

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62033-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Commission
  2. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  3. Swedish Research Council
  4. ALF Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background In 2008, the first transplantation of a tissue-engineered trachea in a human being was done to replace an end-staged left main bronchus with malacia in a 30-year-old woman. We report 5 year follow-up results. Methods The patient was followed up approximately every 3 months with multidetector CT scan and bronchoscopic assessment. We obtained mucosal biopsy samples every 6 months for histological, immunohistochemical, and electron microscopy assessment. We also assessed quality of life, respiratory function, cough reflex test, and production and specificity of recipient antibodies against donor human leucocyte antigen. Findings By 12 months after transplantation, a progressive cicatricial stenosis had developed in the native trachea close to the tissue-engineered trachea anastomosis, which needed repeated endoluminal stenting. However, the tissue-engineered trachea itself remained open over its entire length, well vascularised, completely re-cellularised with respiratory epithelium, and had normal ciliary function and mucus clearance. Lung function and cough reflex were normal. No stem-cell-related teratoma formed and no anti-donor antibodies developed. Aside from intermittent bronchoscopic interventions, the patient had a normal social and working life. Interpretation These clinical results provide evidence that a tissue-engineering strategy including decellularisation of a human trachea, autologous epithelial and stem-cell culture and differentiation, and cell-scaffold seeding with a bioreactor is safe and promising.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据