4.7 Article

Production of Tissue-Engineered Skin Substitutes for Clinical Applications: Elimination of Serum

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612537

关键词

cell culture; tissue engineering; defined medium; stem cells; skin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tissue-engineered skin substitutes (TESs) used for severe burn injuries have traditionally been cultured using bovine serum, but a new study shows that serum-free media can be used to produce high quality TESs that are macroscopically and histologically similar to those produced with serum. The serum-free TESs expressed the same genes and had comparable mechanical properties to serum-cultured TESs. They were also successfully grafted onto mice for a six-month period.
Tissue-engineered skin substitutes (TESs) are used as a treatment for severe burn injuries. Their production requires culturing both keratinocytes and fibroblasts. The methods to grow these cells have evolved over the years, but bovine serum is still commonly used in the culture medium. Because of the drawbacks associated with the use of serum, it would be advantageous to use serum-free media for the production of TESs. In a previous study, we developed a serum-free medium (Surge SFM) for the culture of keratinocytes. Herein, we tested the use of this medium, together with a commercially available serum-free medium for fibroblasts (Prime XV), to produce serum-free TESs. Our results show that serum-free TESs are macroscopically and histologically similar to skin substitutes produced with conventional serum-containing media. TESs produced with either culture media expressed keratin 14, Ki-67, transglutaminase 1, filaggrin, type I and IV collagen, and fibronectin comparably. Mechanical properties, such as contraction and tensile strength, were comparable between TESs cultured with and without serum. Serum-free TESs were also successfully grafted onto athymic mice for a six-month period. In conclusion, Surge SFM and Prime XV serum-free media could be used to produce high quality clinical-grade skin substitutes.

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