BACKGROUND: In vitro growth techniques for intestinal crypts and single intestinal stem cells have been recently described, but several questions of translational importance remain unaddressed. The purpose of this study was to first, evaluate if intestinal crypts reproducibly expand in vitro; second, determine the impact of age and region of intestine on crypt growth in vitro; and third, determine the effects of cryopreservation on crypt growth in vitro. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Crypts were harvested from 5 cm of proximal, middle, and distal small intestine of C57BL/6J mice aged 4 wk, 6-8 wk, 12-14 wk, and 18-20 wk (n = 4-6 animals) and cultured. For each region, we determined the efficiency of crypts forming enterospheres (day 1) and progressing to enteroids (day 7). Subsequently, enteroids were passaged and cryopreserved to determine if growth was changed by these manipulations. RESULTS: Forty-three to 99% of intestinal crypts formed enterospheres, with higher efficiency in proximal small intestine and in younger mice. Twenty-five to 64% of enterospheres progressed to budding enteroids within 7 d. In vitro expansion was greater in proximal enteroids. This expansion continued in a logarithmic fashion, with ≈ 97% replating efficiency of isolated enteroid crypt buds. Following cryopreservation, ≈ 90% of enteroids recovered normal proliferative capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Intestinal crypt culture is efficient and significantly expands intestinal tissue in a reproducible manner. Regional and age growth differences may reflect distinct stem cell characteristics or differences in support cells. The ability to culture and expand intestinal tissue in vitro provides a potential translational approach toward understanding and treating patients with short bowel syndrome.
BACKGROUND: In vitro growth techniques for intestinal crypts and single intestinal stem cells have been recently described, but several questions of translational importance remain unaddressed. The purpose of this study was to first, evaluate if intestinal crypts reproducibly expand in vitro; second, determine the impact of age and region of intestine on crypt growth in vitro; and third, determine the effects of cryopreservation on crypt growth in vitro. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Crypts were harvested from 5 cm of proximal, middle, and distal small intestine of C57BL/6J mice aged 4 wk, 6-8 wk, 12-14 wk, and 18-20 wk (n = 4-6 animals) and cultured. For each region, we determined the efficiency of crypts forming enterospheres (day 1) and progressing to enteroids (day 7). Subsequently, enteroids were passaged and cryopreserved to determine if growth was changed by these manipulations. RESULTS: Forty-three to 99% of intestinal crypts formed enterospheres, with higher efficiency in proximal small intestine and in younger mice. Twenty-five to 64% of enterospheres progressed to budding enteroids within 7 d. In vitro expansion was greater in proximal enteroids. This expansion continued in a logarithmic fashion, with ≈ 97% replating efficiency of isolated enteroid crypt buds. Following cryopreservation, ≈ 90% of enteroids recovered normal proliferative capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Intestinal crypt culture is efficient and significantly expands intestinal tissue in a reproducible manner. Regional and age growth differences may reflect distinct stem cell characteristics or differences in support cells. The ability to culture and expand intestinal tissue in vitro provides a potential translational approach toward understanding and treating patients with short bowel syndrome.
Authors: Ashish Gupta; Anupam Dixit; Kevin M Sales; Marc C Winslet; Alexander M Seifalian Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: O Goulet; S Baglin-Gobet; C Talbotec; L Fourcade; V Colomb; F Sauvat; J-P Jais; J-L Michel; D Jan; C Ricour Journal: Eur J Pediatr Surg Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 2.191
Authors: Peter Jung; Toshiro Sato; Anna Merlos-Suárez; Francisco M Barriga; Mar Iglesias; David Rossell; Herbert Auer; Mercedes Gallardo; Maria A Blasco; Elena Sancho; Hans Clevers; Eduard Batlle Journal: Nat Med Date: 2011-09-04 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Nicholas Lahar; Nan Ye Lei; Jiafang Wang; Ziyad Jabaji; Stephaine C Tung; Vaidehi Joshi; Michael Lewis; Matthias Stelzner; Martín G Martín; James C Y Dunn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-11-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bailey C E Peck; Amanda T Mah; Wendy A Pitman; Shengli Ding; P Kay Lund; Praveen Sethupathy Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2017-01-04 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Byung-Ju Jin; Sailaja Battula; Nick Zachos; Olga Kovbasnjuk; Jennifer Fawlke-Abel; Julie In; Mark Donowitz; Alan S Verkman Journal: Biomicrofluidics Date: 2014-04-01 Impact factor: 2.800
Authors: Caitlyn W Barrett; Vishruth K Reddy; Sarah P Short; Amy K Motley; Mary K Lintel; Amber M Bradley; Tanner Freeman; Jefferson Vallance; Wei Ning; Bobak Parang; Shenika V Poindexter; Barbara Fingleton; Xi Chen; Mary K Washington; Keith T Wilson; Noah F Shroyer; Kristina E Hill; Raymond F Burk; Christopher S Williams Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2015-06-08 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Kapil Saxena; Sarah E Blutt; Khalil Ettayebi; Xi-Lei Zeng; James R Broughman; Sue E Crawford; Umesh C Karandikar; Narayan P Sastri; Margaret E Conner; Antone R Opekun; David Y Graham; Waqar Qureshi; Vadim Sherman; Jennifer Foulke-Abel; Julie In; Olga Kovbasnjuk; Nicholas C Zachos; Mark Donowitz; Mary K Estes Journal: J Virol Date: 2015-10-07 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Courtney E Vishy; Elzbieta A Swietlicki; Vered Gazit; Suneetha Amara; Gabriela Heslop; Jianyun Lu; Marc S Levin; Deborah C Rubin Journal: Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 4.052