4.4 Article

Urethral Reconstruction With Tissue Engineering and RNA Interference Techniques in Rabbits

期刊

UROLOGY
卷 81, 期 5, 页码 1075-1080

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.041

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30901503]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE To investigate the feasibility of replacing urinary epithelial cells with oral keratinocytes and transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) 1 siRNA transfected fibroblasts seeded on bladder acellular matrix graft (BAMG) to reconstruct urethra. METHODS Autologous oral keratinocytes and TGF-beta 1 siRNA transfected fibroblasts were seeded onto BAMGs to obtain a tissue-engineered mucosa. The tissue-engineered mucosa was assessed using morphology and scanning electron microscopy. In 27 male rabbits, a ventral urethral mucosal defect was created. Urethroplasty was performed with autogenic oral keratinocyte and TGF-beta 1 siRNA transfected fibroblast-seeded BAMGs (9 rabbits, group 1), with autogenic oral keratinocyte-seeded BAMGs (9 rabbits, group 2) or with BAMGs with no cell seeding (9 rabbits, group 3). Retrograde urethrography and histological analyses were performed to evaluate the results of urethroplasty. RESULTS In vitro, oral keratinocytes and TGF-beta 1 siRNA transfected fibroblasts had good biocompatibility with BAMGs. In vivo, the urethra kept a wide caliber in groups 1 and 2. Strictures were observed in group 3. Histologically, the retrieved urethra in group 3 showed fibrosis and inflammation during 6 months. Stratified epithelial layer regenerated in group 2, whereas there was no evidence of formation of capillary in the epithelial lower layer during the study period. Stratified epithelial layer and formation of capillary in the epithelial lower layer were evident after 6 months in group 1. CONCLUSION Our study suggested that oral keratinocytes and TGF-beta 1 siRNA transfected fibroblasts could be used as a source of seed cells for urethral tissue engineering. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.

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