Ann C Gaffey1, Minna H Chen2, Alen Trubelja1, Chantel M Venkataraman1, Carol W Chen1, Jennifer J Chung1, Susan Schultz3, Chandra M Sehgal3, Jason A Burdick2, Pavan Atluri4. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 2. Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. Electronic address: Pavan.atluri@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The ventricle undergoes adverse remodeling after myocardial infarction, resulting in abnormal biomechanics and decreased function. We hypothesize that tissue-engineered therapy could minimize postischemic remodeling through mechanical stress reduction and retention of tensile myocardial properties due to improved endothelial progenitor cell retention and intrinsic biomechanical properties of the hyaluronic acid shear-thinning gel. METHODS: Endothelial progenitor cells were harvested from adult Wistar rats and resuspended in shear-thinning gel. The constructs were injected at the border zone of ischemic rat myocardium in an acute model of myocardial infarction. Myocardial remodeling, tensile properties, and hemodynamic function were analyzed: control (phosphate-buffered saline), endothelial progenitor cells, shear-thinning gel, and shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cells. Novel high-resolution, high-sensitivity ultrasound with speckle tracking allowed for global strain analysis. Uniaxial testing assessed tensile biomechanical properties. RESULTS: Shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell injection significantly increased engraftment and retention of the endothelial progenitor cells within the myocardium compared with endothelial progenitor cells alone. With the use of strain echocardiography, a significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction was noted in the shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell cohort compared with control (69.5% ± 10.8% vs 40.1% ± 4.6%, P = .04). A significant normalization of myocardial longitudinal displacement with subsequent stabilization of myocardial velocity with shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell therapy compared with control was also evident (0.84 + 0.3 cm/s vs 0.11 ± 0.01 cm/s, P = .03). A significantly positive and higher myocardial strain was observed in shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell (4.5% ± 0.45%) compared with shear-thinning gel (3.7% ± 0.24%), endothelial progenitor cell (3.5% ± 0.97%), and control (8.6% ± 0.3%, P = .05). A resultant reduction in dynamic stiffness was noted in the shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This novel injectable shear-thinning hyaluronic acid hydrogel demonstrates stabilization of border zone myocardium with reduction in adverse myocardial remodeling and preservation of myocardial biomechanics. The cellular construct provides a normalization of strain measurements and reduces left ventricular dilatation, thus resulting in improvement of left ventricular function.
OBJECTIVES: The ventricle undergoes adverse remodeling after myocardial infarction, resulting in abnormal biomechanics and decreased function. We hypothesize that tissue-engineered therapy could minimize postischemic remodeling through mechanical stress reduction and retention of tensile myocardial properties due to improved endothelial progenitor cell retention and intrinsic biomechanical properties of the hyaluronic acid shear-thinning gel. METHODS: Endothelial progenitor cells were harvested from adult Wistar rats and resuspended in shear-thinning gel. The constructs were injected at the border zone of ischemicrat myocardium in an acute model of myocardial infarction. Myocardial remodeling, tensile properties, and hemodynamic function were analyzed: control (phosphate-buffered saline), endothelial progenitor cells, shear-thinning gel, and shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cells. Novel high-resolution, high-sensitivity ultrasound with speckle tracking allowed for global strain analysis. Uniaxial testing assessed tensile biomechanical properties. RESULTS: Shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell injection significantly increased engraftment and retention of the endothelial progenitor cells within the myocardium compared with endothelial progenitor cells alone. With the use of strain echocardiography, a significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction was noted in the shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell cohort compared with control (69.5% ± 10.8% vs 40.1% ± 4.6%, P = .04). A significant normalization of myocardial longitudinal displacement with subsequent stabilization of myocardial velocity with shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell therapy compared with control was also evident (0.84 + 0.3 cm/s vs 0.11 ± 0.01 cm/s, P = .03). A significantly positive and higher myocardial strain was observed in shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell (4.5% ± 0.45%) compared with shear-thinning gel (3.7% ± 0.24%), endothelial progenitor cell (3.5% ± 0.97%), and control (8.6% ± 0.3%, P = .05). A resultant reduction in dynamic stiffness was noted in the shear-thinning gel + endothelial progenitor cell cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This novel injectable shear-thinning hyaluronic acid hydrogel demonstrates stabilization of border zone myocardium with reduction in adverse myocardial remodeling and preservation of myocardial biomechanics. The cellular construct provides a normalization of strain measurements and reduces left ventricular dilatation, thus resulting in improvement of left ventricular function.
Authors: Boaz D Rosen; Bernhard L Gerber; Thor Edvardsen; Ernesto Castillo; Luciano C Amado; Khurram Nasir; Dara L Kraitchman; Nael F Osman; David A Bluemke; João A C Lima Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2004-06-17 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Partho P Sengupta; Vijay K Krishnamoorthy; Josef Korinek; Jagat Narula; Mani A Vannan; Steven J Lester; Jamil A Tajik; James B Seward; Bijoy K Khandheria; Marek Belohlavek Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Y Joseph Woo; Corinna M Panlilio; Richard K Cheng; George P Liao; Pavan Atluri; Vivian M Hsu; Jeffrey E Cohen; Hina W Chaudhry Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-07-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Michael Hofmann; Kai C Wollert; Gerd P Meyer; Alix Menke; Lubomir Arseniev; Bernd Hertenstein; Arnold Ganser; Wolfram H Knapp; Helmut Drexler Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-04-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Elena Piegari; Giovanni Di Salvo; Biagio Castaldi; Maria Redenta Vitelli; Gabriella Rodolico; Paolo Golino; Raffaele Calabrò; Francesco Rossi; Liberato Berrino Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2007-10-23 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Kevin L Sack; Eric Aliotta; Jenny S Choy; Daniel B Ennis; Neil H Davies; Thomas Franz; Ghassan S Kassab; Julius M Guccione Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2020-05-16 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Hyun-Ji Park; Kenneth J De Jesus Morales; Sruti Bheri; Brandon P Kassouf; Michael E Davis Journal: Stem Cells Date: 2021-09-04 Impact factor: 6.277
Authors: Nicolas Herrera-Zelada; Ursula Zuñiga-Cuevas; Andres Ramirez-Reyes; Sergio Lavandero; Jaime A Riquelme Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 5.810