4.1 Article

Creation and implantation of acellular rat renal ECM-based scaffolds

期刊

ORGANOGENESIS
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 58-74

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15476278.2015.1072661

关键词

bioscaffold; extracellular matrix; kidney transplantation; organ bioengineering; rat model; regenerative medicine; scaffold

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Kidney transplantation is the only potentially curative treatment for patient facing end-stage renal disease, and it is now routinely used. Its use is mainly limited by the supply of transplantable donor organs, which far exceeds the demand. Regenerative medicine and tissue engineering offer promising means for overcoming this shortage. In the present study, we developed and validated a protocol for producing acellular rat renal scaffolds. Left kidneys were removed from 26 male Lewis rats (weights: 250-350 g) and decellularized by means of aortic anterograde perfusion with ionic and anionic detergents (Triton X-100 1% and SDS 1%, respectively). 19 scaffolds thus obtained (and contralateral native kidneys as controls) were deeply characterized in order to evaluate the decellularization quality, the preservation of extracellular matrix components and resultant micro-angioarchitecture structure. The other 7 were transplanted into 7 recipient rats that had undergone unilateral nephrectomy. Recipients were sacrificed on post-transplantation day 7 and the scaffolds subjected to histologic studies. The dual-detergent protocol showed, with only 5 h of perfusion per organ, to obtain thoroughly decellularized renal scaffolds consisting almost exclusively of extracellular matrix. Finally the macro-and the microarchitecture of the renal parenchyma were well preserved, and the grafts were implanted with ease. Seven days after transplant, the scaffolds were morphologically intact although all vascular structures were obstructed with thrombi. Production and implantation of acellular rat renal scaffolds is a suitable platform for further studies on regenerative medicine and tissue engineering.

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

4.1
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