| Literature DB >> 26937166 |
Ozlem Barut Selver1, Ismet Durak1, Mehmet Gürdal2, Kemal Baysal2, Halil Ates3, Zeynep Ozbek1, Zheng Wang4, Albert Wu4, J Mario Wolosin4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the corneal regenerative capacity of sequentially generated primary, secondary, and tertiary limbal explant outgrowths in a limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) surgical model.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26937166 PMCID: PMC4757454
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Vis ISSN: 1090-0535 Impact factor: 2.367
Figure 1Scatter and JC1 exclusion in cells grown on hAM or Falcon substrata. A–C: Cells from explants cultured over human amniotic membrane (hAM). D–F: Cells from cultures on synthetic membrane. A and D: Scatter plots. B–F: JC1 bivariate emission dot plots. Note the distinct shape of the main cell cohort. C and F: Contour plots. The demarcated area at the center of the plot was used to determine the emission intensities and the intensity ratios described in Table 1.
Comparison of cells properties for outgrowths performed over synthetic permeable membrane (Falcon) or preserved, de-epthelialized hAM.
| Parameter: | A. FSC | B. JC1 | C. Mitochondrial membrane potential | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Substratum: | hAM | Synth. | hAM | Synth. | hAM | | | Synthetic | | |
| Wavelength: | | | | | 525* | 585 | R** | 525* | 585 | R** |
| Mean | 100 | 112.5 | 12 | 5.4 | 100 | 53.9 | 0.54 | 73.2 | 53 | 0.73 |
| ±SD | 7.1 | 8.1 | 5.5 | 1.4 | 10.8 | 3.7 | 0.03 | 7.7 | 3.7 | 0.12 |
| n= | 6 | | 6 | | 7 | | | | | |
| p< | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.0002*; 0.0001** | |||||||
Figure 2Comparison of growth and differentiation markers in primary- and tertiary-generation explant outgrowths. A and B: p63 immunostaining. C and D: Krt3 immunostaining. A and C: Primary cultures. B and D: Tertiary-generation cultures. E: Western blots. Targets and culture generations are indicated. Bar equals 50 µm in A and B and 33 µm in C and D.
Figure 3H&E stainings of the ocular surface immediately after the combined surgical and debridement treatment. A: Composite of micrographs covering the limbal and peripheral zone. The areas subjected to surgical excision and debridement are indicated. B: Higher magnification of the transition between the surgically excised and debrided areas. C: Area in the central corneal epithelium with remnants of mechanically broken basal cells (arrow in insert). Bar equals 900 μm in A, 300 μm in B and C, and 100 μm in C, insert.
Figure 4Photographs of corneas 6 months after excision surgery and grafting of explant outgrowths. A: Human amniotic membrane (hAM) alone. B–D: hAM with outgrowths from the contralateral and donor eye explants. B: Grade 0 neovascularization (neo) and opacity (opc). C: Neo, 1; opc, 0. D: Neo, 2; opc, 2.
Clinical outcome of grafts.
| Outgrowths | # Rbts | Neovascularization | Opacity | Staining | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G0 | G1 | G2 | G0 | G1 | G2 | G0 | G1 | G2 | ||
| Primary | 6 | ♦ | | | ♦ | | | ♦ | | |
| Secondary | 4 | ♦ | | | ♦ | | | ♦ | | |
| 1 | | | ♦ | | | ♦ | | | ♦ | |
| 1 | | | ♦ | | ♦ | | | | ♦ | |
| Tertiary | 4 | ♦ | | | ♦ | | | ♦ | | |
| 1 | | ♦ | | ♦ | | | | ♦ | | |
| 1 | ♦ | ♦ | ♦ | |||||||
Figure 5Histological and immunochemical details of the limbal and corneal zone of the control ocular surface and ocular surfaces grafted with primary outgrowths following radical limbal excision and corneal epithelial removal. A–E, L, and M: Donor cornea. The area selected was not subjected to surgical biopsy excision. A–C: Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain at three magnifications. Note the loose stroma defining the limbal papilla. D and E: p63 stain of the limbal and central corneal zone. Note that p63 is strongly expressed in the nuclei of most cells in both zones, including some suprabasal nuclei. L and M: Krt3 stain in the limbus and the central cornea. Note the pronounced limbal rete ridge appearance in the limbus and the absence of Krt3 in the basal cell layer there. F–K, N, and O: Ocular surface grafted with a primary-generation outgrowth at 6 months post-surgery. F–H: H&E stain at different magnifications in two corneas. Note the absence of a limbal papilla and rete ridges, multiple zones of engrossed epithelium with perpendicular elongated cells within the peripheral area, and the normal appearance of the central cornea (K). L and M: p63 stain of peripheral and central cornea. As in the donor eye, there is profuse expression of p63 throughout the cornea. N and O: Krt3 staining of the peripheral and central corneal zones. Note the absence of Krt3-negative cells at the conjunctival–corneal junction.
Figure 6Histological and p63 immunochemical features of four treated corneas grafted with tertiary-generation limbal explant outgrowths. Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) composites of the full cornea (A) or large areas of it (B and C) are shown. Unframed inserts in B and C show magnified H&E details of the limbal–peripheral and corneal zone. Framed inserts show p63 staining of respective adjacent sections at arbitrary magnifications.
Figure 7Krt3 expression. Donor cornea in corneas regenerated with tertiary-generation explant outgrowths. A: Central epithelium of the donor cornea. B: Central epithelium of the corresponding grafted contralateral eye. C–E: Equivalent zone in another three corneas regenerated with tertiary-generation explant outgrowths. F and G: Morphology and Krt3 stain in the peripheral zone of the corneas in C and E. F: The cornea is counterstained with propidium iodide (PI). Bar=50 μm.
Figure 8Forward scatter and JC1 exclusion of cells collected from the periphery of the contralateral donor and regenerated corneas. A and B: Forward (FSC) for regenerated and donor contralateral eyes. Density plots. C and D: Corresponding JC1 exclusion results.
Figure 9Phase contrast micrographs of outgrowths from limbal–peripheral biopsies obtained from donors and the contralateral regenerated corneas. A and B: Outgrowths from a cornea regenerated with a primary-generation explant culture (top) and from its contralateral donor eye (bottom). C–F: Equivalent micrograph pair from a secondary outgrowth-based regeneration (C) and from three tertiary outgrowth-based regenerations (D–F). The regularly distributed white puncta on these images arises from reflections of the 0.4 μm pore of the permeable substratum. The scale bars equal 250 μm in A and 50 μm in B through F.