4.5 Article

Transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells within a poly(lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) scaffold improves cardiac function in a rat myocardial infarction model

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 147-153

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfn017

关键词

Myocardial infarction; Heart failure; Mesenchymal stem cell; Poly(lactide-co-epsilon-caprolactone); Cardiac tissue engineering; Scaffold

资金

  1. Seoul R& BD Program of Korea [10548]
  2. Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [A080189]
  3. the Korean Government [R13-2008-026-01000-0]
  4. Korea Health Promotion Institute [A080189] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cardiac tissue engineering has been proposed as an appropriate method to repair myocardial infarction (MI). Evidence suggests that a cell with scaffold combination was more effective than a cell-only implant. Nevertheless, to date, there has been no research into elastic biodegradable poly(lactide-co-epsilon-caprolactone) (PLCL) scaffolds. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with elastic biodegradable PLCL scaffold transplants in a rat MI model. Ten days after inducing MI through the cryoinjury method, a saline control, MSC, PLCL scaffold, or MSC-seeded PLCL scaffold was transplanted onto the hearts. Four weeks after transplantation, cardiac function and histology were evaluated. Transplanted MSCs survived and differentiated into cardiomyocytes in the injured region. Left ventricular ejection fraction in the MSC + PLCL group increased by 23% compared with that in the saline group; it was also higher in the MSC group. The infarct area in the MSC + PLCL group was decreased by 29% compared with that in the saline group; it was also reduced in the MSC group. Mesenchymal stem cells plus PLCL should be an excellent combination for cardiac tissue engineering.

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

4.5
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