4.6 Article

Evaluation of a Novel Non-Destructive Catch and Release Technology for Harvesting Autologous Adult Stem Cells

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053933

关键词

-

资金

  1. Strategic Projects to Access Research and Knowledge (SPARK), United Kingdom

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cell based therapies are required now to meet the critical care needs of paediatrics and healthy ageing in an increasingly long-lived human population. Repair of compromised tissue by supporting autologous regeneration is a life changing objective uniting the fields of medical science and engineering. Adipose stem cells (adSCs) are a compelling candidate for use in cell based medicine due to their plasticity and residence in numerous tissues. Adipose found in all animals contains a relatively high concentration of stem cells and is easily isolated by a minimally invasive clinical intervention; such as liposuction. Methods: This study utilised primary rat adipose to validate a novel strategy for selecting adult stem cells. Experiments explored the use of large, very dense cell-specific antibody loaded isolation beads (diameter 5x-10x greater than target cells) which overcome the problem of endocytosis and have proved to be very effective in cell isolation from minimally processed primary tissue. The technique also benefited from pH mediated release, which enabled elution of captured cells using a simple pH shift. Results: Large beads successfully captured and released adSCs from rat adipose, which were characterised using a combination of microscopy, flow cytometry and PCR. The resultant purified cell population retains minimal capture artefact facilitating autologous reperfusion or application in in vitro models. Conclusion: Although evidenced here for adSCs, this approach provides a technological advance at a platform level; whereby it can be applied to isolate any cell population for which there is a characterised surface antigen.

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

4.6
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