4.8 Article

Tissue engineering of heart valves - Decellularized porcine and human valve scaffolds differ importantly in residual potential to attract monocytic cells

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 111, 期 21, 页码 2792-2797

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.473629

关键词

immunology; inflammation; tissue engineering; valves

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background - Tissue-engineered or decellularized heart valves have already been implanted in humans or are currently approaching the clinical setting. The aim of this study was to examine the migratory response of human monocytic cells toward decellularized porcine and human heart valves, a pivotal step in the early immunologic reaction. Methods and Results - Porcine and human pulmonary valve conduits were decellularized, and migration of U-937 monocytic cells toward extracted heart valve proteins was examined in a transmigration chamber in vitro. Homogenized tissue specimens were size fractionated by SDS-PAGE. The decellularization procedure effectively reduced the migration of human monocytes toward all heart valve tissue. However, only the antigen reduction of human pulmonary valves abolished the monocytic response (wall, 0.88 +/- 0.19% versus 30.20 +/- 3.93% migrated cells [mean +/- SEM]; cusps, 0.10 +/- 0.06% versus 10.24 +/- 1.83%) and was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than that of the decellularized porcine equivalent (wall, 5.03 +/- 0.14% versus 24.31 +/- 2.38%; cusps, 3.18 +/- 0.38% versus 10.24 +/- 1.83%). SDS-PAGE of the pulmonary heart valve tissue revealed that considerable amounts of proteins with different molecular weights that were not detected in the human equivalent remain in the decellularized porcine heart valve. Conclusions - We describe for the first time that the remaining potential of decellularized pulmonary heart valves to attract monocytic cells depends strongly on whether porcine or human scaffolds were used. These findings will have an important impact on further investigations in the field of heart valve tissue engineering.

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

4.8
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