4.8 Article

Monitoring of implanted stem cell migration in vivo:: A highly resolved in vivo magnetic resonance imaging investigation of experimental stroke in rat

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.242435499

关键词

embryonic stem cells; cerebral ischemia; cell labeling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In vivo monitoring of stem cells after grafting is essential for a better understanding of their migrational dynamics and differentiation processes and of their regeneration potential. Migration of endogenous or grafted stem cells and neurons has been described in vertebrate brain, both under normal conditions from the subventricular zone along the rostral migratory stream and under pathophysiological conditions, such as degeneration or focal cerebral ischemia. Those studies, however, relied on invasive analysis of brain sections in combination with appropriate staining techniques. Here, we demonstrate the observation of cell migration under in vivo conditions, allowing the monitoring of the cell dynamics within individual animals, and for a prolonged time. Embryonic stem (ES) cells, constitutively expressing the GFIP, were labeled by a lipofection procedure with a MRI contrast agent and implanted into rat brains. Focal cerebral ischemia had been induced 2 weeks before implantation of ES cells into the healthy, contralateral hemisphere. MRI at 78-mum isotropic spatial resolution permitted the observation of the implanted cells with high contrast against the host tissue, and was confirmed by GFP registration. During 3 weeks, cells migrated along the corpus callosum to the ventricular walls, and massively populated the borderzone of the damaged brain tissue on the hemisphere opposite to the implantation sites. Our results indicate that ES cells have high migrational dynamics, targeted to the cerebral lesion area. The imaging approach is ideally suited for the noninvasive observation of cell migration, engraftment, and morphological differentiation at high spatial and temporal resolution.

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