4.4 Article

Collagen (NeuraGen®) nerve conduits and stem cells for peripheral nerve gap repair

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 572, 期 -, 页码 26-31

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.04.029

关键词

Peripheral nerve regeneration; FDA-approved collagen conduits; Adipose-derived stem cells; Schwann cell-like differentiation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Collagen nerve guides are used clinically for peripheral nerve defects, but their use is generally limited to lesions up to 3 cm. In this study we combined collagen conduits with cells as an alternative strategy to support nerve regeneration over longer gaps. In vitro cell adherence to collagen conduits (NeuraGen (R) nerve guides) was assessed by scanning electron microscopy. For in vivo experiments, conduits were seeded with either Schwann cells (SC), SC-like differentiated bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (dMSC), SC-like differentiated adipose-derived stem cells (dASC) or left empty (control group), conduits were used to bridge a 1 cm gap in the rat sciatic nerve and after 2-weeks immunohistochemical analysis was performed to assess axonal regeneration and SC infiltration. The regenerative cells showed good adherence to the collagen walls. Primary SC showed significant improvement in distal stump sprouting. No significant differences in proximal regeneration distances were noticed among experimental groups. dMSC and dASC-loaded conduits showed a diffuse sprouting pattern, while SC-loaded showed an enhanced cone pattern and a typical sprouting along the conduits walls, suggesting an increased affinity for the collagen type I fibrillar structure. NeuraGen guides showed high affinity of regenerative cells and could be used as efficient vehicle for cell delivery. However, surface modifications (e.g. with extracellular matrix molecule peptides) of NeuraGen guides could be used in future tissue-engineering applications to better exploit the cell potential. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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