4.1 Article

Mesenchymal stem cells support hepatocyte function in engineered liver grafts

期刊

ORGANOGENESIS
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 268-277

出版社

LANDES BIOSCIENCE
DOI: 10.4161/org.27879

关键词

stem cell; scaffold matrix; tissue engineering; organ transplantation; cell transplantation; regenerative medicine

资金

  1. Takeda Science Foundation
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  3. KAKENHI [23689059]
  4. Japan Science and Technology Agency
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23689059] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies suggest that organ decellularization is a promising approach to facilitate the clinical application of regenerative therapy by providing a platform for organ engineering. This unique strategy uses native matrices to act as a reservoir for the functional cells which may show therapeutic potential when implanted into the body. Appropriate cell sources for artificial livers have been debated for some time. The desired cell type in artificial livers is primary hepatocytes, but in addition, other supportive cells may facilitate this stem cell technology. In this context, the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) is an option meeting the criteria for therapeutic organ engineering. Ideally, supportive cells are required to (1) reduce the hepatic cell mass needed in an engineered liver by enhancing hepatocyte function, (2) modulate hepatic regeneration in a paracrine fashion or by direct contact, and (3) enhance the preservability of parenchymal cells during storage. Here, we describe enhanced hepatic function achieved using a strategy of sequential infusion of cells and illustrate the advantages of co-cultivating bone marrow-derived MSCs with primary hepatocytes in the engineered whole-liver scaffold. These co-recellularized liver scaffolds colonized by MSCs and hepatocytes were transplanted into live animals. After blood flow was established, we show that expression of adhesion molecules and proangiogenic factors was upregulated in the graft.

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