4.4 Article

Impact of decellularization of xenogeneic tissue on extracellular matrix integrity for tissue engineering of heart valves

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY
卷 143, 期 3, 页码 201-208

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsb.2003.08.002

关键词

tissue engineering; aortic heart valves; decellularization; extracellular matrix; NIR multiphoton laser microscopy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The multidisciplinary research of tissue engineering utilizes biodegradable or decellularized scaffolds with autologous cell seeding. Objective of this study was to investigate the impact of different decellularization protocols on extracellular matrix integrity of xenogeneic tissue by means of multiphoton femtosecond laser scanning microscopy, biochemical and histological analysis. Pulmonary valves were dissected from porcine hearts and placed in a solution of trypsin-EDTA and incubated at 37degreesC for either 5, 8, or 24 h, followed by a 24 h PBS washing. Native and decellularized valves were processed for histology, DNA, cell proliferation, matrix proteins and biomechanical testing. Multiphoton NIR laser microscopy has been applied for high-resolution 3D imaging of collagen and elastin. Distinct differences in several ECM components following decellularization time were observed. Total GAG contents decreased in a time-dependent manner, with o-sulfated GAGs being more susceptible to degradation than n-sulfated GAGs. Efficiency of insoluble collagen extraction increased proportionally with decellularization time, suggesting ECM-integrity may be compromised with prolonged incubation. Biomechanical testing revealed a gradual weakening of mechanical strength with increased decellularization time. The enzymatic decellularization process of heart valves revealed a time-dependent loss of cells, ECM components and biomechanical strength. In order to avoid any immune response a thorough decellularization of 24 h remains mandatory. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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