4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

New 3D hyaluronan-based scaffold for in vitro reconstruction of the rat sciatic nerve

期刊

NEUROLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 190-196

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1179/174313208X281082

关键词

biocompatibility; cytotoxicity; endothelial cell; hyaluronic acid; peripheral nerve; Schwann cell; tissue engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: For peripheral nerve regeneration, three-dimensional distribution and growth of cells within the porous scaffold are of clinical significance. The put-pose of this study was to test in vitro a novel hyaluronic acid-based tubular conduit (HYAFF-11 biomaterials: 1 x 10 mm) as a nerve guide. Methods: Human fibroblasts, RN22 Schwann cell lines, human, umbilical vein endothelial cells and primary nerve cells, obtained from neonatal rat sciatic nerve, were harvested and seeded on HYAFF-11 devices. Histologic (hematoxylin-eosin), immunohistochemical (antibodies to S100, CD31 and Von Willebrand factor) and PCR analyses were performed after 7 and 14 days from cell seeding onto biomaterials. MTT-based (thiazolyl blue) and DELFIA cell proliferation kit tests were performed to observe the biocompatibility of the cells cultured within the biomaterial devices. Results: We concluded that the conduits were not cytotoxic and demonstrated that cultured RN22 Schwann cells and rat Schwann cells grow in vitro on new artificial nerve conduits. We thus inferred that the HYAFF-11 conduit was a suitable biomaterial able to support nerve cell growth in vitro and after 14 days of cultivation, remained circular with a round lumen, maintaining the size and shape of its original architecture. Finally, attachment and proliferation of endothelial cells attested to the feasibility of developing a coculture system to promote in vivo integration of a microvascularized nerve substitute. Discussion: HYAFF-11 pre-seeded with Schwann and endothelial cells has the potential to be an alternative to autografting for the repair of long peripheral nerve defects.

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

4.2
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