OBJECTIVES: To examine adherence and viability of human urothelial cells seeded on commercially available small intestine submucosa (SIS) specimens under serum-free conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Before seeding, SIS was either washed with incubation medium or coated with collagen A, fibronectin, or pronectin. A possible influence of SIS itself on the viability of urothelial cells was analysed with conditioned cell culture medium obtained by incubation of SIS for 24hours. In addition, untreated SIS and a setting without SIS were used as controls. Viability of urothelial cells was analysed with the WST-1 assay until day 9. Histology of seeded and unseeded SIS specimens was investigated after Papanicolaou staining. To demonstrate urothelial cell adherence on SIS, immunohistology was performed with a mixture of monoclonal AE1 and AE3 anticytokeratin antibodies. RESULTS: Urothelial cells seeded on SIS revealed no measurable cell viability. SIS-conditioned cell culture medium was cytotoxic for urothelial cells after 24 hours. Histology only demonstrated cell nuclei and no cytoplasm both in seeded and unseeded SIS specimens, thus indicating porcine DNA. Expression of the cell type-specific marker proteins AE1/AE3 could not be demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Since the commercially available SIS specimens used contained porcine DNA residues and demonstrated cytotoxic effects on urothelial cells, SIS is not suitable for in vitro construction of urothelial cell-matrix implants.
OBJECTIVES: To examine adherence and viability of human urothelial cells seeded on commercially available small intestine submucosa (SIS) specimens under serum-free conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Before seeding, SIS was either washed with incubation medium or coated with collagen A, fibronectin, or pronectin. A possible influence of SIS itself on the viability of urothelial cells was analysed with conditioned cell culture medium obtained by incubation of SIS for 24hours. In addition, untreated SIS and a setting without SIS were used as controls. Viability of urothelial cells was analysed with the WST-1 assay until day 9. Histology of seeded and unseeded SIS specimens was investigated after Papanicolaou staining. To demonstrate urothelial cell adherence on SIS, immunohistology was performed with a mixture of monoclonal AE1 and AE3 anticytokeratin antibodies. RESULTS: Urothelial cells seeded on SIS revealed no measurable cell viability. SIS-conditioned cell culture medium was cytotoxic for urothelial cells after 24 hours. Histology only demonstrated cell nuclei and no cytoplasm both in seeded and unseeded SIS specimens, thus indicating porcine DNA. Expression of the cell type-specific marker proteins AE1/AE3 could not be demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Since the commercially available SIS specimens used contained porcine DNA residues and demonstrated cytotoxic effects on urothelial cells, SIS is not suitable for in vitro construction of urothelial cell-matrix implants.
Authors: K-D Sievert; G Feil; M Renninger; C Selent; S Maurer; S Conrad; J Hennenlotter; U Nagele; R Schäfer; R Möhle; T Skutella; H Northoff; J Seibold; A Stenzl Journal: Urologe A Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Martin Vaegler; Andrew T Lenis; Lisa Daum; Bastian Amend; Arnulf Stenzl; Patricia Toomey; Markus Renninger; Margot S Damaser; Karl-Dietrich Sievert Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Kshitiz Raj Shrestha; Seung Hwan Jeon; Ae Ryang Jung; In Gul Kim; Ga Eun Kim; Yong Hyun Park; Soo Hyun Kim; Ji Youl Lee Journal: Tissue Eng Regen Med Date: 2019-03-22 Impact factor: 4.169
Authors: Terry W J Steele; Charlotte L Huang; Evelyne Nguyen; Udi Sarig; Saranya Kumar; Effendi Widjaja; Joachim S C Loo; Marcelle Machluf; Freddy Boey; Zlata Vukadinovic; Andreas Hilfiker; Subbu S Venkatraman Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 3.896