4.8 Article

The influence of RGD-bearing hydrogels on the re-expression of contractile vascular smooth muscle cell phenotype

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 30, 期 25, 页码 4127-4135

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.038

关键词

Smooth muscle cell; Arterial tissue engineering; Hydrogel; Scaffold; Vascular graft

资金

  1. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering [5R01EB002067]
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [1R01HL087843]
  3. NIH [T32GM07250]
  4. American Heart Association Predoctoral Fellowship [07154228]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reports on the ability of poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA) hydrogel scaffolds with pendant integrin-binding GRGDSP peptides (RGD-gels) to support the re-differentiation of cultured vascular smooth muscle cells (SMCs) toward a contractile phenotype. Human coronary artery SMCS were seeded on RGD-gels, hydrogels with other extracellular matrix derived peptides, fibronectin (FN) and laminin (LN). Differentiation was induced on RGD-gels with low serum medium containing soluble heparin, and the differentiation status was monitored by mRNA expression, protein expression, and intracellular protein organization of the contractile smooth muscle markers, smooth muscle a-actin, calponin, and SM-22 alpha. RGD-gels supported a rapid induction (2.7- to 25-fold up-regulation) of SMC marker gene mRNA, with expression levels that were equivalent to FN and LN controls. Marker protein levels mirrored the changes in mRNA expression, with levels on RGD-gels indistinguishable from FN and LN controls. Furthermore, these markers co-localized in stress fibers within SMCs on RGD-gels suggesting the recapitulation of a contractile apparatus within the cells. These results indicate that SMCs cultured on RGD-bearing hydrogels can re-differentiate toward a contractile phenotype suggesting this material is an excellent candidate for further development as a bioactive scaffold that regulates SMC phenotype. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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