Literature DB >> 24380436

Comparison of olfactory bulbar and mucosal cultures in a rat rhizotomy model.

Ahmed Ibrahim1, Daqing Li, Andrew Collins, Pawel Tabakow, Geoffrey Raisman, Ying Li.   

Abstract

In an ongoing clinical trial, a spinal injured patient who received a transplant of autologous cells cultured from the olfactory bulb is showing greater functional benefit than three previous patients with transplants of mucosal origin. Previous laboratory studies of transplantation into rat spinal cord injuries show that the superior reparative benefits of bulbar over mucosal cultures are associated with regeneration of severed corticospinal tract fibers over a bridge of olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) formed across the injury site. In a rat rhizotomy paradigm, we reported that transplantation of bulbar cell cultures also enables severed axons of the C6-T1 dorsal roots to regenerate across a bridge of OECs into the spinal cord and restore electrophysiological transmission and forepaw grasping during a climbing test. We now report a repeat of the same rhizotomy procedure in 25 rats receiving cells cultured from olfactory mucosal biopsies. In no case did the transplanted cells form a bridging pathway. No axons crossed from the severed roots to the spinal cord, and there was no restoration of forepaw grasping. This suggests that the superior clinical benefit in the patient receiving bulbar cell transplants is due to regeneration of severed fibers across the injury site, and this correlates with imaging and the pattern of functional recovery. Using present culture protocols, the yield of OECs from bulbar biopsies is around 50%, but that from mucosal biopsies is less than 5%. Improving the yield of OECs from mucosal biopsies might avoid the necessity for the intracranial approach to obtain bulbar cells.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24380436     DOI: 10.3727/096368913X676213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Transplant        ISSN: 0963-6897            Impact factor:   4.064


  9 in total

1.  Repair, protection and regeneration of spinal cord injury.

Authors: 
Journal:  Neural Regen Res       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.135

2.  Geoffrey Raisman, 1939-2017: "Opening a Scientific Door and Giving Hope".

Authors:  Paul R Sanberg
Journal:  Cell Transplant       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Three-dimensional Collagen Scaffolds in Cultures of Olfactory Ensheathing Cells Used for Severed Spinal Cord Regeneration.

Authors:  Wojciech Fortuna; Benita Wiatrak; Paulina Jawień; Adriana Kubis-Kubiak; Ying Li; Daqing Li; Paweł Tabakow
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.406

4.  Bioprocessing strategies to enhance the challenging isolation of neuro-regenerative cells from olfactory mucosa.

Authors:  Melanie Georgiou; Joana Neves Dos Reis; Rachael Wood; Patricia Perez Esteban; Victoria Roberton; Chris Mason; Daqing Li; Ying Li; David Choi; Ivan Wall
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-09-27       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Methods of olfactory ensheathing cell harvesting from the olfactory mucosa in dogs.

Authors:  Daisuke Ito; Darren Carwardine; Jon Prager; Liang Fong Wong; Masato Kitagawa; Nick Jeffery; Nicolas Granger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Survival and Integration of Transplanted Olfactory Ensheathing Cells are Crucial for Spinal Cord Injury Repair: Insights from the Last 10 Years of Animal Model Studies.

Authors:  Ronak Reshamwala; Megha Shah; James St John; Jenny Ekberg
Journal:  Cell Transplant       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  High-Yield Mucosal Olfactory Ensheathing Cells Restore Loss of Function in Rat Dorsal Root Injury.

Authors:  Kamile Minkelyte; Andrew Collins; Modinat Liadi; Ahmed Ibrahim; Daqing Li; Ying Li
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 6.600

8.  Intravenous transplantation of olfactory bulb ensheathing cells for a spinal cord hemisection injury rat model.

Authors:  Lijian Zhang; Xiaoqing Zhuang; Yao Chen; Hechun Xia
Journal:  Cell Transplant       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 9.  The Struggle to Make CNS Axons Regenerate: Why Has It Been so Difficult?

Authors:  James W Fawcett
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 3.996

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.