4.8 Article

Myocardial contraction and hyaluronic acid mechanotransduction in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transformation of endocardial cells

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 35, 期 9, 页码 2809-2815

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.12.051

关键词

Collagen; Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT); Heart valve; Hyaluronic acid; Mechanical properties

资金

  1. American Heart Association [12PRE12070154]
  2. NIH [HL094707, HL092551]
  3. NSF [1055384]
  4. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  5. Directorate For Engineering [1055384] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) of endocardial cells is a critical initial step in the formation of heart valves. The collagen gel in vitro model has provided significant information on the role of growth factors regulating EMT but has not permitted investigation of mechanical factors. Therefore we sought to develop a system to probe the effects of mechanical inputs on endocardial EMT by incorporating hyaluronic acid (HA), the primary component of endocardial cushions in developing heart valves, into the gel assay. This was achieved using a combination collagen and crosslinkable methacrylated HA hydrogel (Coll-MeHA). Avian atrioventricular canal explants on Coll-MeHA gels showed increased numbers of transformed cells. Analysis of the mechanical properties of Coll-MeHA gels shows that stiffness does not directly affect EMT. Hydrogel deformation from the beating myocardium of explants directly led to higher levels of regional gel deformation and larger average strain magnitudes associated with invaded cells on Coll-MeHA gels. Inhibition of this contraction reduced EMT on all gel types, although to a lesser extent on Coll-MeHA gels. Using the system we have developed, which permits the manipulation of mechanical factors, we have demonstrated that active mechanical forces play a role in the regulation of endocardial EMT. (C) 2013 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