Literature DB >> 23327620

Modulating the physical microenvironment to study regenerative processes in vitro using cells from mouse phalangeal elements.

Kristen M Lynch1, Tabassum Ahsan.   

Abstract

Epimorphic regeneration in humans of complex multitissue structures is primarily limited to the digit tip. In a comparable mouse model, the response is level-specific in that regeneration occurs after amputation at the distal end of the terminal phalanx, but not more proximally. Recent isolation of stromal cells from CD1 murine phalangeal elements two and three (P2 and P3) allow for comparative studies of cells prevalent at the amputation plane of a more proximal region (considered nonregenerative) and a more distal region (considered regenerative), respectively. This study used adherent, suspension, and collagen gel cultures to investigate cellular processes relevant to the initial response to injury. Overall, P2 cells were both more migratory and able to compact collagen gels to a greater extent compared to P3 cells. This observed increased capacity of P2 cells to generate traction forces was likely related to the higher expression of key cytoskeletal proteins (e.g., microfilament, nonkeratin intermediate filaments, and microtubules) compared to P3 cells. In contrast, P3 cells were found to be more proliferative than P2 cells under all three culture conditions and to have higher expression of keratin proteins. In addition, when cultured in suspension rather than on adherent surfaces, P3 cells were both more proliferative and had greater gene expression for matrix proteins. Together these results add to the known inherent differences in these stromal cells by characterizing responses to the physical microenvironment. Further, while compaction by P2 cells confirm that collagen gels is a useful model to study wound healing, the response of P3 cells indicate that suspension culture, in which cell-cell interactions dominate like in the blastema, may be better suited to study regeneration. Therefore, this study can help develop clinical strategies for promoting regeneration through increased understanding in the properties of cells involved in endogenous repair as well as informed selection of useful in vitro models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23327620      PMCID: PMC3638516          DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2012.0503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A        ISSN: 1937-3341            Impact factor:   3.845


  32 in total

Review 1.  Cutaneous wound healing.

Authors:  A J Singer; R A Clark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-09-02       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  The basic science of wound healing.

Authors:  George Broughton; Jeffrey E Janis; Christopher E Attinger
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 3.  Limb regeneration in higher vertebrates: developing a roadmap.

Authors:  Manjong Han; Xiaodong Yang; Gail Taylor; Carol A Burdsal; Rosalie A Anderson; Ken Muneoka
Journal:  Anat Rec B New Anat       Date:  2005-11

Review 4.  Ontogenetic decline of regenerative ability and the stimulation of human regeneration.

Authors:  David M Gardiner
Journal:  Rejuvenation Res       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.663

5.  Regeneration potency of mouse limbs.

Authors:  Hideki Masaki; Hiroyuki Ide
Journal:  Dev Growth Differ       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.053

Review 6.  Initiation of limb regeneration: the critical steps for regenerative capacity.

Authors:  Hitoshi Yokoyama
Journal:  Dev Growth Differ       Date:  2007-11-06       Impact factor: 2.053

7.  Development and regeneration of the neonatal digit tip in mice.

Authors:  Manjong Han; Xiaodong Yang; Jangwoo Lee; Christopher H Allan; Ken Muneoka
Journal:  Dev Biol       Date:  2007-12-27       Impact factor: 3.582

Review 8.  Wound repair and regeneration.

Authors:  Geoffrey C Gurtner; Sabine Werner; Yann Barrandon; Michael T Longaker
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Mice regrow the tips of their foretoes.

Authors:  R B Borgens
Journal:  Science       Date:  1982-08-20       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 10.  Fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and wound contraction.

Authors:  F Grinnell
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 10.539

View more
  6 in total

1.  Correlating the effects of bone morphogenic protein to secreted soluble factors from fibroblasts and mesenchymal stem cells in regulating regenerative processes in vitro.

Authors:  Kristen M Lynch; Tabassum Ahsan
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.845

Review 2.  Looking Ahead to Engineering Epimorphic Regeneration of a Human Digit or Limb.

Authors:  Lina M Quijano; Kristen M Lynch; Christopher H Allan; Stephen F Badylak; Tabassum Ahsan
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 6.389

3.  Lack of vimentin impairs endothelial differentiation of embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  Liana C Boraas; Tabassum Ahsan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 4.  Concise Review: Translating Regenerative Biology into Clinically Relevant Therapies: Are We on the Right Path?

Authors:  Jennifer Simkin; Ashley W Seifert
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 6.940

Review 5.  The mammalian blastema: regeneration at our fingertips.

Authors:  Jennifer Simkin; Mimi C Sammarco; Lindsay A Dawson; Paula P Schanes; Ling Yu; Ken Muneoka
Journal:  Regeneration (Oxf)       Date:  2015-06-09

6.  Collection of Wound Exudate From Human Digit Tip Amputations Does Not Impair Regenerative Healing: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Tobias Kisch; Julia Maria Klemens; Katharina Hofmann; Eirini Liodaki; Matthias Gierloff; Dirk Moellmeier; Felix Stang; Peter Mailaender; Jens Habermann; Matthias Brandenburger
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.817

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.