Successful muscle regeneration by a homologous microperforated scaffold seeded with autologous mesenchymal stromal cells in a porcine esophageal substitution model.

3D cell culture Quantum Molecular Resonance esophagus mesenchymal stromal cells scaffold tissue engineering

Journal

Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology
ISSN: 1756-283X
Titre abrégé: Therap Adv Gastroenterol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101478893

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 08 11 2019
accepted: 06 04 2020
entrez: 12 6 2020
pubmed: 12 6 2020
medline: 12 6 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Since the esophagus has no redundancy, congenital and acquired esophageal diseases often require esophageal substitution, with complicated surgery and intestinal or gastric transposition. Peri-and-post-operative complications are frequent, with major problems related to the food transit and reflux. During the last years tissue engineering products became an interesting therapeutic alternative for esophageal replacement, since they could mimic the organ structure and potentially help to restore the native functions and physiology. The use of acellular matrices pre-seeded with cells showed promising results for esophageal replacement approaches, but cell homing and adhesion to the scaffold remain an important issue and were investigated. A porcine esophageal substitute constituted of a decellularized scaffold seeded with autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) was developed. In order to improve cell seeding and distribution throughout the scaffolds, they were micro-perforated by Quantum Molecular Resonance (QMR) technology (Telea Electronic Engineering). The treatment created a microporous network and cells were able to colonize both outer and inner layers of the scaffolds. Non seeded (NSS) and BM-MSCs seeded scaffolds (SS) were implanted on the thoracic esophagus of 4 and 8 pigs respectively, substituting only the muscle layer in a mucosal sparing technique. After 3 months from surgery, we observed an esophageal substenosis in 2/4 NSS pigs and in 6/8 SS pigs and a non-practicable stricture in 1/4 NSS pigs and 2/8 SS pigs. All the animals exhibited a normal weight increase, except one case in the SS group. Actin and desmin staining of the post-implant scaffolds evidenced the regeneration of a muscular layer from one anastomosis to another in the SS group but not in the NSS one. A muscle esophageal substitute starting from a porcine scaffold was developed and it was fully repopulated by BM-MSCs after seeding. The substitute was able to recapitulate in shape and function the original esophageal muscle layer.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Since the esophagus has no redundancy, congenital and acquired esophageal diseases often require esophageal substitution, with complicated surgery and intestinal or gastric transposition. Peri-and-post-operative complications are frequent, with major problems related to the food transit and reflux. During the last years tissue engineering products became an interesting therapeutic alternative for esophageal replacement, since they could mimic the organ structure and potentially help to restore the native functions and physiology. The use of acellular matrices pre-seeded with cells showed promising results for esophageal replacement approaches, but cell homing and adhesion to the scaffold remain an important issue and were investigated.
METHODS METHODS
A porcine esophageal substitute constituted of a decellularized scaffold seeded with autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) was developed. In order to improve cell seeding and distribution throughout the scaffolds, they were micro-perforated by Quantum Molecular Resonance (QMR) technology (Telea Electronic Engineering).
RESULTS RESULTS
The treatment created a microporous network and cells were able to colonize both outer and inner layers of the scaffolds. Non seeded (NSS) and BM-MSCs seeded scaffolds (SS) were implanted on the thoracic esophagus of 4 and 8 pigs respectively, substituting only the muscle layer in a mucosal sparing technique. After 3 months from surgery, we observed an esophageal substenosis in 2/4 NSS pigs and in 6/8 SS pigs and a non-practicable stricture in 1/4 NSS pigs and 2/8 SS pigs. All the animals exhibited a normal weight increase, except one case in the SS group. Actin and desmin staining of the post-implant scaffolds evidenced the regeneration of a muscular layer from one anastomosis to another in the SS group but not in the NSS one.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
A muscle esophageal substitute starting from a porcine scaffold was developed and it was fully repopulated by BM-MSCs after seeding. The substitute was able to recapitulate in shape and function the original esophageal muscle layer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32523626
doi: 10.1177/1756284820923220
pii: 10.1177_1756284820923220
pmc: PMC7257852
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1756284820923220

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s), 2020.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest statement: GC is a consultant for Olympus, Cook Medical, and Boston Scientific. IB is a research grant holder from Apollo Endosurgery and a consultant for Apollo Endosurgery, Cook Medical, and Boston Scientific.

Références

Ann Thorac Surg. 2011 Feb;91(2):e15-6
pubmed: 21256256
Stem Cell Res Ther. 2018 Jan 16;9(1):10
pubmed: 29338788
J Paediatr Child Health. 2017 Dec;53(12):1159-1166
pubmed: 28799279
Matrix Biol. 2010 Oct;29(8):690-700
pubmed: 20797438
J Pediatr Surg. 2000 Jul;35(7):1097-103
pubmed: 10917304
PLoS One. 2018 Jan 2;13(1):e0190082
pubmed: 29293552
Nature. 2004 Apr 1;428(6982):487-92
pubmed: 15057821
Pediatr Surg Int. 2007 Jan;23(1):21-6
pubmed: 17004093
Transplant Proc. 2010 May;42(4):1341-3
pubmed: 20534296
Sci Transl Med. 2017 Nov 15;9(416):
pubmed: 29141887
Lancet. 2016 Jul 2;388(10039):55-61
pubmed: 27068836
Stem Cells. 2014 Jun;32(6):1408-19
pubmed: 24578244
Int J Mol Med. 2002 Aug;10(2):177-82
pubmed: 12119555
Life Sci. 1975 Dec 1;17(11):1721-32
pubmed: 1207385
J Surg Res. 2005 Sep;128(1):87-97
pubmed: 15922361
Biomaterials. 2005 Nov;26(31):6217-28
pubmed: 15913763
Sci Rep. 2018 Mar 7;8(1):4123
pubmed: 29515136
Tissue Eng Part A. 2011 Jun;17(11-12):1643-50
pubmed: 21306292
Cell Transplant. 2017 Dec;26(12):1831-1839
pubmed: 29390879
Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 Sep;87(9):909-14
pubmed: 22958995
Pediatr Surg Int. 2013 Jan;29(1):87-95
pubmed: 23124129
Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2015 Aug;21(4):393-410
pubmed: 25813694
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018 Dec;1434(1):156-163
pubmed: 30088660
Eur J Pediatr Surg. 1995 Aug;5(4):206-10
pubmed: 7577857
Biomaterials. 2005 May;26(15):2567-74
pubmed: 15585259
Dis Esophagus. 2006;19(4):254-9
pubmed: 16866856
Front Physiol. 2016 Feb 09;7:24
pubmed: 26903875
Surg Today. 2018 Aug;48(8):739-747
pubmed: 29214351
J Surg Res. 2013 Jun 1;182(1):40-8
pubmed: 22925499
Biomaterials. 2018 Aug;175:1-18
pubmed: 29793088
Ann Surg. 2010 Aug;252(2):271-80
pubmed: 20622655
BMC Cell Biol. 2013 Oct 30;14:48
pubmed: 24168020
Artif Organs. 2009 Apr;33(4):328-33
pubmed: 19335409
J Pediatr Surg. 2003 Jan;38(1):53-7; discussion 53-7
pubmed: 12592618
Exp Cell Res. 2004 Nov 15;301(1):1-7
pubmed: 15501438
Eur J Immunol. 2006 Oct;36(10):2566-73
pubmed: 17013987
Ann Thorac Surg. 2013 Mar;95(3):1096-7
pubmed: 23438545
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006 Jun 15;77(4):795-801
pubmed: 16575908
Cytotherapy. 2006;8(4):315-7
pubmed: 16923606
World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Dec 21;18(47):6900-7
pubmed: 23322987
Am J Gastroenterol. 1999 Jun;94(6):1490-6
pubmed: 10364012
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:9831534
pubmed: 28540307
Ann Biomed Eng. 2015 Mar;43(3):577-92
pubmed: 25213186
J Am Coll Surg. 2005 Aug;201(2):253-62
pubmed: 16038824
J Extracell Vesicles. 2018 Nov 23;7(1):1535750
pubmed: 30637094
Cytotherapy. 2016 Jan;18(1):13-24
pubmed: 26631828
J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2015 May;9(5):504-11
pubmed: 24668694
Stem Cells. 2016 Mar;34(3):601-13
pubmed: 26782178
Ann Thorac Surg. 2014 Jan;97(1):283-8
pubmed: 24266951
Acta Biomater. 2009 Jan;5(1):1-13
pubmed: 18938117
Nat Rev Immunol. 2008 Sep;8(9):726-36
pubmed: 19172693
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016 Jun;22(6):712-7
pubmed: 26969739
Stem Cell Res Ther. 2017 Jan 24;8(1):14
pubmed: 28115021
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000 Jun;119(6):1126-32
pubmed: 10838528
J Visc Surg. 2016 Feb;153(1):21-9
pubmed: 26711880
Ann Surg. 2013 Aug;258(2):221-32
pubmed: 23782908

Auteurs

Maurizio Marzaro (M)

Pediatric Surgery Department, AULSS2 Treviso, Italy.

Mattia Algeri (M)

Hemato-Oncology, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Luigi Tomao (L)

Hemato-Oncology, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Stefano Tedesco (S)

Telea Biotech, Vicenza, Italy.

Tamara Caldaro (T)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Valerio Balassone (V)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Anna Chiara Contini (AC)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Luciano Guerra (L)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Giovanni Federici D'Abriola (G)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Paola Francalanci (P)

Pathology Department, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Maria Emiliana Caristo (ME)

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Cen.Ri.S.

Lorenzo Lupoi (L)

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Cen.Ri.S.

Ivo Boskoski (I)

Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS Largo A. Gemelli, 8, Rome 00168, Italy.

Angela Bozza (A)

LTCA, ULSS 8 Berica, Vicenza, Italy.

Giuseppe Astori (G)

LTCA, ULSS 8 Berica, Vicenza, Italy.

Gianantonio Pozzato (G)

Telea Electronic Engineering, Vicenza, Italy.

Alessandro Pozzato (A)

Telea Electronic Engineering, Vicenza, Italy.

Guido Costamagna (G)

Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Luigi Dall'Oglio (L)

Digestive Endoscopy and Surgical Unit, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Roma, Italy.

Classifications MeSH