| Literature DB >> 24701583 |
Fahuan Song1, Mei Tian1, Hong Zhang1.
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a serious disease of the center nervous system (CNS). It is a devastating injury with sudden loss of motor, sensory, and autonomic function distal to the level of trauma and produces great personal and societal costs. Currently, there are no remarkable effective therapies for the treatment of SCI. Compared to traditional treatment methods, stem cell transplantation therapy holds potential for repair and functional plasticity after SCI. However, the mechanism of stem cell therapy for SCI remains largely unknown and obscure partly due to the lack of efficient stem cell trafficking methods. Molecular imaging technology including positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), optical imaging (i.e., bioluminescence imaging (BLI)) gives the hope to complete the knowledge concerning basic stem cell biology survival, migration, differentiation, and integration in real time when transplanted into damaged spinal cord. In this paper, we mainly review the molecular imaging technology in stem cell therapy for SCI.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24701583 PMCID: PMC3950476 DOI: 10.1155/2014/759514
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Stem cell-based cell therapy in experimental SCI models.
| Cell type | Cell number | Route | Time after SCI | Weeks after cell injection | Host animal | Cotreatment method | Functional outcome | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMSCs | 5 × 106 | IL | 24 h | 3 | Rabbit | BMSCs were Ngb gene-modified | Significant functional improvement | [ |
| OPCs | 5 × 105 | IL | 3 d | 4 | Rat | No | Functional improvements in SSEP amplitudes and latencies | [ |
| iPSC-NS/PCs | 1 × 106 | IL | 9 d | 12 | Marmoset | No | Promoted functional recovery | [ |
| NSCs + OECs | 3 × 105 | IL | Immediately | 4 | Rat | Cotransplantation of NSCs and OECs | Improve sensory function | [ |
| ESCs | 5 × 105 | IV | 2 h | 4 | Mice | No | Promoted hind-limb recovery | [ |
| iPSCs | 5 × 105 | IL | 9 d | 6 | Mice | No | Promoting locomotor function recovery | [ |
| NS/PCs | 8 × 104 | IL | 9 d | 8 | Rat | Coinjected with HAMC | Enhanced tissue benefit and functional recovery | [ |
| EMSCs | 5 × 104 | IL | 0.5 h | 12 | Rat | Coinjected with fibrin scaffolds | Improve the behavioral | [ |
| BMSCs | 1 × 107 | IL | 7 d | 4 | Dog | No | Improved functional recovery | [ |
IL: intralesional injection, IT: intratheca injection, IV: intravenous injection, BMSCs: bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, Ngb: neuroglobin, SSEPs: somatosensory evoked potential, iPSC-NS/PCs: induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neural stem/progenitor cells, HUCBCs: human umbilical cord blood cells, hES: transplanted human embryonic stem, OPCs: cell-derived oligodendrocyte progenitor cells, ESCs: embryonic stem cells, iPSCs: induced pluripotent stem cells, NSPCs: neural stem/progenitor cells, HAMC: hydrogel blend of hyaluronan and methyl cellulose, and EMSCs: ectomesenchymal stem cells.
Figure 1The T2-weighted MR images of the injured rat's spinal cord before and after SPC-01 cell transplantation. The white arrows show labeled transplanted cells and lesion site. (a) The T2-weighted MR images of a spinal cord lesion 5 days after lesion induction before transplantation. (b) Spinal cord with a cell graft 8 weeks after cell transplantation. (c) Control spinal cord lesion 8 weeks after saline injection. (d) Two serial sections were stained with the human mitochondrial marker (MTCO2). (e) The same sections of D were stained with iron. (f) Overlay of MTC02 and iron staining [80].
Figure 2The time course of viability of transplanted NSPCs for SCI. (a) Images of a representative mouse that received acute transplantation (TP) of luciferase-expressing NSPCs confirmed long-term cell viability. Drastic reductions in signal intensity within the first 4 days after transplantation and then relatively stable bioluminescent signals for the following 6 wk were observed in both acute and delayed transplantation groups. There were no differences between acute and delayed transplantation groups in both value of signal intensity (b) and the rate to initial value (c) at each time point. Values are means ± SE (n = 8). (d) The correlation between grafted cell numbers and luminescent intensity was confirmed in vivo. Values are means ± SE (n = 4) [59].
Advantages and limitations of different imaging methods for detection of grafted stem cells (modified from Modo et al. [81] and Spiriev et al. [82]).
| Imaging modality | PET | MRI | BLI | FLI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Depth of penetration | No limit | No limit | 1-2 mm | <1 mm |
| Spatial resolution | 1-2 mm | 10–100 | Several mm | 2-3 mm |
| Temporal resolution | sec–min | min–hrs | sec–min | sec–min |
| Imaging agents | Radionuclide labeled compound | Gadolinium, | Luciferins | Fluorescent protein |
| Toxicity | No | Yes | No | No |
| Time range of detection | 6–12 months | 1-2 months | 2–8 weeks | Long-term |
| Detection limits in terms of cell numbers in vivo | 1 × 104–1 × 105 | 5 × 105–1 × 106 | 1 × 103–1 × 106 | 2 × 104–5 × 105 |
Sec: second, min: minute, and hrs: hours.
Figure 3Multimodality of imaging can be applied for tracking stem cell behavior. A work flow chart for labeling cells and introducing labeled cells in vivo: firstly, cells are labeled using a marker for positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), bioluminescence imaging (BLI), or fluorescence imaging (FLI). Secondly, cells are cultured in vitro and injected into the injured spinal cord. Finally, stem cells are then tracked in vivo with a camera or scanner.