4.4 Article

Comparison of osteogenic ability of rat mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow, periosteum, and adipose tissue

期刊

CALCIFIED TISSUE INTERNATIONAL
卷 82, 期 3, 页码 238-247

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00223-008-9112-y

关键词

mesenchymal stem cell; bone marrow; adipose tissue; periosteum; osteogenesis; tissue engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) reside in many types of tissue and are able to differentiate into various functional cells including osteoblasts. Recently, adipose tissue-derived MSCs (AMSCs) have been shown to differentiate into many lineages, and they are considered a source for tissue regeneration. The purpose of this study was to compare the osteogenic differentiation capability of MSCs from bone marrow (BMSCs), MSCs from periosteum (PMSCs), and AMSCs using in vitro culture and in vivo implantation experiments. We harvested these MSCs from 7-week-old rats. The cells were seeded and cultured for 7 days in primary culture to assay a colony-forming unit. The frequency of the unit was the smallest in the BMSCs (P < 0.001). After primary culture, subculture was performed under osteogenic differentiation conditions for 1 and 2 weeks to detect mineralization as well as the bone-specific proteins of alkaline phosphatase and osteocalcin as osteogenic markers. BMSCs and PMSCs showed distinct osteogenic differentiation capability in comparison with other MSCs (P < 0.001). For the in vivo assay, composites of these cells and hydroxyapatite ceramics were subcutaneously implanted into syngeneic rats and harvested after 6 weeks. Micro-computed tomographic (CT) and histological analyses demonstrated that new bone formation was detected in the composites using BMSCs and PMSCs, although it was hard to detect in other composites. The CT analyses also demonstrated that the bone volume of BMSC composites was more than that of AMSC composites (P < 0.001). These results indicate that BMSCs and PMSCs could be ideal candidates for utilization in practical bone tissue regeneration.

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