| Literature DB >> 22577591 |
Marie-Noëlle Giraud1, Anne Géraldine Guex, Hendrik T Tevaearai.
Abstract
Cell therapies have gained increasing interest and developed in several approaches related to the treatment of damaged myocardium. The results of multiple clinical trials have already been reported, almost exclusively involving the direct injection of stem cells. It has, however, been postulated that the efficiency of injected cells could possibly be hindered by the mechanical trauma due to the injection and their low survival in the hostile environment. It has indeed been demonstrated that cell mortality due to the injection approaches 90%. Major issues still need to be resolved and bed-to-bench followup is paramount to foster clinical implementations. The tissue engineering approach thus constitutes an attractive alternative since it provides the opportunity to deliver a large number of cells that are already organized in an extracellular matrix. Recent laboratory reports confirmed the interest of this approach and already encouraged a few groups to investigate it in clinical studies. We discuss current knowledge regarding engineered tissue for myocardial repair or replacement and in particular the recent implementation of nanotechnological approaches.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22577591 PMCID: PMC3346974 DOI: 10.1155/2012/971614
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiol Res Pract ISSN: 2090-0597 Impact factor: 1.866
Figure 1Cell therapy approaches for myocardial infarction: cells are isolated from biopsies, expanded, and eventually differentiated in vitro following specific culture conditions. Conditioned medium containing secreted or lyophilized factors (A) or isolated cells (B) are injected directly within the myocardium or within the coronaries. Further in vitro process from cultured cells enables the development of structured engineered muscle tissue with or without contracting properties that can be directly sutured or glued at the surface of the infarct (C). Functionalized matrix combining biologically active factors and engrafted cells (D) represents a more sophisticated alternative.
Potential cell source.
| Source | Definition | Drawbacks |
|---|---|---|
| Donor/recipient | ||
| Autologous | Same individual | Not always available (genetic diseases, age) |
| Allogenic | Same species | Immunological issues |
| Xenogenic | Different species | Ethical issues and rejection |
| Syngenic or isogenic | Genetically identical individuals (clones, inbred) | Most appropriate for research with animal model |
|
| ||
| Origin/differentiation | ||
|
| ||
| Primary | Tissue or organ/specialized | Large expansion needed |
| Secondary | Cell bank | Cryopreservation/immunological issues |
| Embryonic stem cells (iPSCs) | Undifferentiated | Ethical issues/purification/teratoma |
| Adult stem cells | Commited | Selection of type/source |
Potential cells for new therapeutic treatment.
| Candidates | Concerns | Side effects | Mechanism of action | Clinical trials | Change in cardiac function (% EF versus ctrl.)* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Human embryonic stem cells | Ethics purification | Teratoma | Differentiation/myogenesis | FDA approval | |
| Fetal/neonatal cardiac muscle cells | Ethics accessibility | Differentiation/myogenesis | × | ||
| Induced pluripotent stem cells | Teratoma | Differentiation/myogenesis | × | ||
| Cardiac stem cells | Differentiation/myogenesis |
| −0.2; +6.0 | ||
| Skeletal muscle myoblasts | Poor electrocoupling | Arrhythmia | Paracrine effect |
| +3; +14 |
| Bone marrow stem cells | Purification/loss of function with age | Arrhythmia? | Paracrine effect |
| −3.0; +12 |
| Progenitors | Survival and controlled differentiation | Paracrine effect |
| +2.8, +6.3 |
*EF: ejection fraction of the treated heart compared to control groups (adapted from Segers and Lee, 2008 [28]).
Figure 2Schematic illustration of different functionalization principles. (I) Smart materials, changing conformation, and exposing different chemical groups upon temperature change or a change in enzyme concentration. (II) Surface functionalized materials. A synthetic scaffold is immersed in a ECM protein solution, allowing for protein adsortion on the surface. (III) Covalently functionalized scaffolds. Functional proteins are coupled to the surface via EDC/NHS chemistry. (IV) Blend materials, (a) hybrid scaffolds of various polymers or (b) hybrid scaffolds of polymers and drugs for controlled release.