4.3 Article

Human amniotic fluid stem cells have better potential in early second trimester of pregnancy and can be reprogramed to iPS

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2017.10.012

关键词

Amniotic fluid stem cells; Second trimester amniocentesis; iPS

资金

  1. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [CMRPG3D1683, CMRPG3G0181]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [MOST106-2314-B-182A-151, MOST104-2314-B-182A-136]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To study the difference of amniotic fluid stem cell potential at different gestational age. Materials and methods: Second trimester amniocentesis was performed during 15 to 22nd week of gestational age in a single medical center from 2015 to 2016. Early second trimester amniotic fluid stem cells (E-AFS) and later one (L-AFS) were defined 15-18th week, and 19-22nd week, respectively. Cell characteristics, surface markers and ability to form induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) were studied. Results: All the amniotic fluid stem cells samples could be isolated and cultured from second trimester amniocentesis. E-AFS showed more Ckit + cell, shorted doubling time, smaller cell size and higher cell density compared to L-AFS. Both groups had the same stem cell surface markers with highly expression of CD44, CD73, CD90, and CD105, negative for CD45. They can easily be reprogramed into amniotic fluid stem cell derived iPS via standard induction. Conclusion: Human amniotic fluid stem cells could be isolated from early or late second trimester amniocentesis with the similar stem cell surface markers presentation, especially in mesenchymal stem cells markers. However, the cells from early second trimester amniocentesis have more Ckit + number and more potential characteristics compared to late second trimester amniocentesis. Both E-AFS and LAFS could form the iPS easily which lead to the future disease modeling study. (C) 2017 Taiwan Association of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.3
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