4.8 Article

Isolation and transplantation of autologous circulating endothelial cells into denuded vessels and prosthetic grafts - Implications for cell-based vascular therapy

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 108, 期 21, 页码 2710-2715

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000096490.16596.A6

关键词

cells; transplantation; grafting

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL-35610, HL-073219, HL-058516, HL-072010] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background - Blood-borne endothelial cells originating from adult bone marrow were reported previously. These cells have the properties of an endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) and can be mobilized by cytokines and recruited to sites of neovascularization, where they differentiate into mature endothelial cells. Current protocols for isolation of EPCs from peripheral blood rely on enrichment and selection of CD34+ mononuclear cells. Methods and Results - In this report, we describe a streamlined method for the isolation and expansion of EPCs from peripheral blood and evaluate their therapeutic potential for autologous cell-based therapy of injured blood vessels and prosthetic grafts. A subset of unfractionated mononuclear cells exhibited the potential to differentiate in vitro into endothelial cells under selective growth conditions. The cells were efficiently transduced ex vivo by a retroviral vector expressing the LacZ reporter gene and could be expanded to yield sufficient numbers for therapeutic applications. Transplantation of these cells into balloon-injured carotid arteries and into bioprosthetic grafts in rabbits led to rapid endothelialization of the denuded vessels and graft segments, resulting in significant reduction in neointima deposition. Conclusions - We conclude that transplantation of EPCs may play a crucial role in reestablishing endothelial integrity in injured vessels, thereby inhibiting neointimal hyperplasia. These findings may have implications for novel and practical cell-based therapies for vascular disease.

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