The effects of synthetic and natural scaffolds on viability and proliferation of adipose-derived stem cells

Q1 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Frontiers in Life Science Pub Date : 2016-01-02 DOI:10.1080/21553769.2015.1077477
M. Ghiasi, N. Kalhor, Reza Tabatabaei Qomi, Mohsen Sheykhhasan
{"title":"The effects of synthetic and natural scaffolds on viability and proliferation of adipose-derived stem cells","authors":"M. Ghiasi, N. Kalhor, Reza Tabatabaei Qomi, Mohsen Sheykhhasan","doi":"10.1080/21553769.2015.1077477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study presents a comparative assessment of adipose-derived stem cell (ADSCs) proliferation rates and their viability on five different scaffolds. Five different biomaterial scaffolds were prepared: alginate, poly lactic-co-glycolic acid, fibrin glue, inactive platelet-rich plasma, and active platelet-rich plasma (APRP). Stem cells were isolated from human adipose tissue. Flow cytometry analysis was performed. Specifically, adipogenesis/osteogenesis/chondrogenesis-associated genes expression was analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. These cells were seeded in the prepared scaffolds. After 14 days, the proliferation and viability of MSCs were evaluated using an MTT assay. Also, stemness genes expression was analyzed with the reverse transcriptasepolymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method. In addition, the DNA content assay was also performed. The obtained results showed a significant difference between cell proliferation and viability of different scaffolds. APRP and alginate were shown to be the most and least suitable scaffolds in terms of enhancing cell proliferation and maintaining cell viability respectively (p < .05). RT-PCR reactions demonstrated the expression of the various stemness-related markers (Nanog, Octamer4A, and Sox2) when ADSC cells were grown separately on the five different scaffolds. Our study indicates that compared with the scaffolds, APRP could be the best scaffold for support of ADSC proliferation.","PeriodicalId":12756,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Life Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21553769.2015.1077477","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Life Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21553769.2015.1077477","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study presents a comparative assessment of adipose-derived stem cell (ADSCs) proliferation rates and their viability on five different scaffolds. Five different biomaterial scaffolds were prepared: alginate, poly lactic-co-glycolic acid, fibrin glue, inactive platelet-rich plasma, and active platelet-rich plasma (APRP). Stem cells were isolated from human adipose tissue. Flow cytometry analysis was performed. Specifically, adipogenesis/osteogenesis/chondrogenesis-associated genes expression was analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. These cells were seeded in the prepared scaffolds. After 14 days, the proliferation and viability of MSCs were evaluated using an MTT assay. Also, stemness genes expression was analyzed with the reverse transcriptasepolymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method. In addition, the DNA content assay was also performed. The obtained results showed a significant difference between cell proliferation and viability of different scaffolds. APRP and alginate were shown to be the most and least suitable scaffolds in terms of enhancing cell proliferation and maintaining cell viability respectively (p < .05). RT-PCR reactions demonstrated the expression of the various stemness-related markers (Nanog, Octamer4A, and Sox2) when ADSC cells were grown separately on the five different scaffolds. Our study indicates that compared with the scaffolds, APRP could be the best scaffold for support of ADSC proliferation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合成支架和天然支架对脂肪干细胞活力和增殖的影响
摘要:本研究比较了脂肪源性干细胞(ADSCs)在五种不同支架上的增殖率及其生存能力。制备海藻酸盐、聚乳酸-羟基乙酸、纤维蛋白胶、无活性富血小板血浆和活性富血小板血浆(APRP)五种不同的生物材料支架。从人脂肪组织中分离出干细胞。流式细胞术分析。具体来说,通过实时聚合酶链反应分析脂肪生成/成骨/软骨生成相关基因的表达。将这些细胞植入制备的支架中。14天后,采用MTT法评估MSCs的增殖和活力。用逆转录聚合酶链式反应(RT-PCR)方法分析干性基因的表达。此外,还进行了DNA含量测定。结果表明,不同支架的细胞增殖和活力存在显著差异。在促进细胞增殖和维持细胞活力方面,APRP和海藻酸盐分别是最适合和最不适合的支架材料(p < 0.05)。RT-PCR反应显示,当ADSC细胞分别在5种不同的支架上生长时,多种干细胞相关标志物(Nanog、Octamer4A和Sox2)均有表达。我们的研究表明,与支架相比,APRP可能是支持ADSC增殖的最佳支架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Life Science
Frontiers in Life Science MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Life Science publishes high quality and innovative research at the frontier of biology with an emphasis on interdisciplinary research. We particularly encourage manuscripts that lie at the interface of the life sciences and either the more quantitative sciences (including chemistry, physics, mathematics, and informatics) or the social sciences (philosophy, anthropology, sociology and epistemology). We believe that these various disciplines can all contribute to biological research and provide original insights to the most recurrent questions.
期刊最新文献
Factors affecting population structure and fruit production of Strychnos innocua Delile and Strychnos spinosa Lam. in Benin, West Africa Characterizing the hindgut microbiome in healthy and ketotic cows Cashmere cyclic growth affected by different photoperiods alters DNA methylation patterns Gene Polymorphisms of the antioxidant enzymes NOX, GSTP, and GPX and diabetic nephropathy risk in Saudi patients with type 2 diabetes Ferroptosis plays a role in osteoarthritis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1