4.7 Article

In vitro studies on space-conforming self-assembling silk hydrogels as a mesenchymal stem cell-support matrix suitable for minimally invasive brain application

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-31905-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. Taif University PhD fellowship (Saudi Arabia)
  2. EPSRC First Grant [EP/N03127X/1]
  3. FP7-PEOPLE-2012-CIG Marie-Curie Action Career Integration Grant within the 7th European Union Framework Program [334134]
  4. Daphne Jackson Fellowship - Medical Research Scotland
  5. EPSRC [EP/N03127X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advanced cell therapies require robust delivery materials and silk is a promising contender with a long clinical track record. Our aim was to optimise self-assembling silk hydrogels as a mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-support matrix that would allow future minimally invasive brain application. We used sonication energy to programme the transition of silk (1-5% w/v) secondary structure from a random coil to a stable beta-sheet configuration. This allowed fine tuning of self-assembling silk hydrogels to achieve space conformity in the absence of any silk hydrogel swelling and to support uniform cell distribution as well as cell viability. Embedded cells underwent significant proliferation over 14 days in vitro, with the best proliferation achieved with 2% w/v hydrogels. Embedded MSCs showed significantly better viability in vitro after injection through a 30G needle when the gels were in the pre-gelled versus post-gelled state. Silk hydrogels (4% w/v) with physical characteristics matching brain tissue were visualised in preliminary in vivo experiments to exhibit good space conformity in an ischemic cavity (intraluminal thread middle cerebral artery occlusion model) in adult male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 3). This study informs on optimal MSC-hydrogel matrix conditions for minimally invasive application as a platform for future experiments targeting brain repair.

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

4.7
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