| Literature DB >> 29341439 |
Deliang Shen1, Miaoda Shen2, Hongxia Liang3, Junnan Tang1, Bo Wang1, Chuang Liu1, Peiwen Wang1, Jianzeng Dong1,4, Ling Li1, Jinying Zhang1, Thomas G Caranasos5.
Abstract
Cardiac stromal cells (CSCs) can be derived from explant cultures, and a subgroup of these cells is viewed as cardiac mesenchymal stem cells due to their expression of CD90. Here, we sought to determine the therapeutic potential of CD90-positive and CD90-negative CSCs in a rat model of chronic myocardial infarction. We obtain CD90-positive and CD90-negative fractions of CSCs from rat myocardial tissue explant cultures by magnetically activated cell sorting. In vitro, CD90-negative CSCs outperform CD90-positive CSCs in tube formation and cardiomyocyte functional assays. In rats with a 30-day infarct, injection of CD90-negative CSCs augments cardiac function in the infarct in a way superior to that from CD90-positive CSCs and unsorted CSCs. Histological analysis revealed that CD90-negative CSCs increase vascularization in the infarct. Our results suggest that CD90-negative CSCs could be a development candidate as a new cell therapy product for chronic myocardial infarction.Entities:
Keywords: CD90; cardiac regeneration; myocardial infarction; stem cells
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29341439 PMCID: PMC5824400 DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.13517
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cell Mol Med ISSN: 1582-1838 Impact factor: 5.310
Figure 1Generation and characterization of CD90‐positive and CD90‐negative CSCs. (A) The process of generating rat CSCs. (B) cell sorting process. (C) The morphology of rat CSCs. (D) Flow cytometry analysis of unsorted CSCs, CD90− and CD90+ CSCs (n = 3). Scale bar = 20 μm.
Figure 2In vitro cardiomyocyte and endothelial cell‐based assays. (A) NRCMs cocultured with conditioned media from CD90− or CD90+ CSCs. Scale bar = 50 μm. (B and C) Representative fluorescent micrographs showing ki67 positive (B) and TUNEL positive (C) cells in NRCM cultures. D: HUVEC tube formation on Matrigel in the presence of conditioned media from CD90− or CD90+ CSCs. Scale bar = 20 μm. Two‐tailed t‐test for comparison.
Figure 3Protein secretion assay. (A–C) Secretion of various growth factors by CD90− and CD90+ CSCs. Concentrations were measured by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). (D) Secretion of various inflammatory cytokines by CD90− and CD90+ CSCs. (E) Map showing the various proteins measured by the protein array. One way ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni correction for comparison in (A–C). Two‐tailed t‐test for comparison for comparison in (D).
Figure 4Cardiac function and heart morphometry after cell transplantation. (A) Representative echocardiography images showing hearts at baseline and end‐point after various treatments. (B) Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEFs). (C) Masson's Trichrome staining and measurement of fibrosis area in the heart (n = 3). One way ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni correction for comparison in (B). Two‐tailed t‐test for comparison for comparison in (C).
Figure 5Engraftment and cardiomyogenesis after cell transplantation. (A) Representative confocal images showing the engraftment of transplanted CD90− and CD90+ CSCs (GFP‐labelled; green) and cardiomyocytes (alpha‐SA‐labelled; red) in the infarct area. (B–C) Quantitation of cell engraftment and numbers of cardiomyocytes (n = 3). Scale bar = 200 μm. Two‐tailed t‐test for comparison.
Figure 6Proliferation of cardiomyocytes. (A) Representative fluorescent micrographs showing ki67 positive nuclei (green) in the myocardium. (B) Quantitation of ki67 and alpha‐SA double positive cells (n = 3). Scale bar = 50 μm. Two‐tailed t‐test for comparison.