S Pulikkot1, Y E Greish, A-H I Mourad, S M Karam. 1. Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates; Department of Chemistry, College of Science, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To generate various polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds and test their suitability for growth and differentiation of immortalized mouse gastric stem (mGS) cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Non-porous, microporous and three-dimensional electrospun microfibrous PCL scaffolds were prepared and characterized for culture of mGS cells. First, growth of mGS cells was compared on these different scaffolds after 3 days culture, using viability assay and microscopy. Secondly, growth pattern of the cells on microfibrous scaffolds was studied after 3, 6, 9 and 12 days culture using DNA PicoGreen assay and scanning electron microscopy. Thirdly, differentiation of the cells grown on microfibrous scaffolds for 3 and 9 days was analysed using lectin/immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The mGS cells grew preferentially on microfibrous scaffolds. From 3 to 6 days, there was increase in cell number, followed by reduction by days 9 and 12. To test whether the reduction in cell number was associated with cell differentiation, cryosections of cell-containing scaffolds cultured for 3 and 9 days were probed with gastric epithelial cell differentiation markers. On day 3, none of the markers examined bound to the cells. However by day 9, approximately, 50% of them bound to N-acetyl-d-glucosamine-specific lectin and anti-trefoil factor 2 antibodies, indicating their differentiation into glandular mucus-secreting cells. CONCLUSIONS: Microfibrous PCL scaffolds supported growth and differentiation of mGS cells into mucus-secreting cells. These data will help lay groundwork for future experiments to explore use of gastric stem cells and PCL scaffolds in stomach tissue engineering.
OBJECTIVES: To generate various polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds and test their suitability for growth and differentiation of immortalized mouse gastric stem (mGS) cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Non-porous, microporous and three-dimensional electrospun microfibrous PCL scaffolds were prepared and characterized for culture of mGS cells. First, growth of mGS cells was compared on these different scaffolds after 3 days culture, using viability assay and microscopy. Secondly, growth pattern of the cells on microfibrous scaffolds was studied after 3, 6, 9 and 12 days culture using DNA PicoGreen assay and scanning electron microscopy. Thirdly, differentiation of the cells grown on microfibrous scaffolds for 3 and 9 days was analysed using lectin/immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The mGS cells grew preferentially on microfibrous scaffolds. From 3 to 6 days, there was increase in cell number, followed by reduction by days 9 and 12. To test whether the reduction in cell number was associated with cell differentiation, cryosections of cell-containing scaffolds cultured for 3 and 9 days were probed with gastric epithelial cell differentiation markers. On day 3, none of the markers examined bound to the cells. However by day 9, approximately, 50% of them bound to N-acetyl-d-glucosamine-specific lectin and anti-trefoil factor 2 antibodies, indicating their differentiation into glandular mucus-secreting cells. CONCLUSIONS: Microfibrous PCL scaffolds supported growth and differentiation of mGS cells into mucus-secreting cells. These data will help lay groundwork for future experiments to explore use of gastric stem cells and PCL scaffolds in stomach tissue engineering.
Authors: Aaron L Carlson; Charles A Florek; Joseph J Kim; Thomas Neubauer; Jennifer C Moore; Rick I Cohen; Joachim Kohn; Martin Grumet; Prabhas V Moghe Journal: FASEB J Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Won Jae Huh; Emel Esen; Jessica H Geahlen; Andrew J Bredemeyer; Ann-Hwee Lee; Guanglu Shi; Stephen F Konieczny; Laurie H Glimcher; Jason C Mills Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2010-10-14 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Jessica M Williams; Adebisi Adewunmi; Rachel M Schek; Colleen L Flanagan; Paul H Krebsbach; Stephen E Feinberg; Scott J Hollister; Suman Das Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2005-01-23 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Marios Giannakis; Swaine L Chen; Sherif M Karam; Lars Engstrand; Jeffrey I Gordon Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-03-10 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Carolina Fracalossi Rediguieri; Terezinha de Jesus Andreoli Pinto; Nadia Araci Bou-Chacra; Raquel Galante; Gabriel Lima Barros de Araújo; Tatiana do Nascimento Pedrosa; Silvya Stuchi Maria-Engler; Paul A De Bank Journal: Tissue Eng Part C Methods Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 3.056
Authors: Juan Zhong; Bin Guo; Jing Xie; Shuwen Deng; Na Fu; Shiyu Lin; Guo Li; Yunfeng Lin; Xiaoxiao Cai Journal: Bone Res Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 13.567