Literature DB >> 31469044

A Comparison of Ovine Facial and Limb Muscle as a Primary Cell Source for Engineered Skeletal Muscle.

Brittany L Rodriguez1, Matthew H Nguyen2, Rachel E Armstrong2, Emmanuel E Vega-Soto2, Phillip M Polkowski2, Lisa M Larkin1,2.   

Abstract

Volumetric muscle loss (VML) contributes to the number of soft tissue injuries that necessitate reconstructive surgery, but treatment options are often limited by tissue availability and donor site morbidity. To combat these issues, our laboratory has developed scaffold-free tissue-engineered skeletal muscle units (SMUs) as a novel treatment for VML injuries. Recently, we have begun experiments addressing VML in facial muscle, and the optimal starting cell population for engineered skeletal muscle tissue for this application may not be cells derived from hindlimb muscles due to reported heterogeneity of cell populations. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare SMUs fabricated from both craniofacial and hindlimb sources to determine which cell source is best suited for the engineering of skeletal muscle. Herein, we assessed the development, structure, and function of SMUs derived from four muscle sources, including two hindlimb muscles (i.e., soleus and semimembranosus [SM]) and two craniofacial muscles (i.e., zygomaticus major and masseter). Overall, the zygomaticus major exhibited the least efficient digestion, and SMUs fabricated from this muscle exhibited the least aligned myosin heavy chain staining and consequently, the lowest average force production. Conversely, the SM muscle exhibited the most efficient digestion and the highest number of myotubes/mm2; however, the SM, masseter, and soleus groups were roughly equivalent in terms of force production and histological structure. Impact Statement An empirical comparison of the development, structure, and function of engineered skeletal muscle tissue fabricated from different muscles, including both craniofacial and hindlimb sources, will not only provide insight into innate regenerative mechanisms of skeletal muscle but also will give our team and other researchers the information necessary to determine which cell sources are best suited for the skeletal muscle tissue engineering.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cell inhomogeneity; muscle-derived progenitor cells; satellite cell; skeletal muscle

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31469044      PMCID: PMC7044784          DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2019.0087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A        ISSN: 1937-3341            Impact factor:   3.845


  36 in total

1.  Methods for animal satellite cell culture under a variety of conditions.

Authors:  N M Burton; J Vierck; L Krabbenhoft; K Bryne; M V Dodson
Journal:  Methods Cell Sci       Date:  2000-03

2.  Satellite cells in human skeletal muscle; from birth to old age.

Authors:  Lex B Verdijk; Tim Snijders; Maarten Drost; Tammo Delhaas; Fawzi Kadi; Luc J C van Loon
Journal:  Age (Dordr)       Date:  2014-04

3.  Engineered skeletal muscle units for repair of volumetric muscle loss in the tibialis anterior muscle of a rat.

Authors:  Keith W VanDusen; Brian C Syverud; Michael L Williams; Jonah D Lee; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 3.845

4.  Histochemical correlates of hamstring injuries.

Authors:  W E Garrett; J C Califf; F H Bassett
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1984 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.202

Review 5.  The regeneration of skeletal muscle fibers following injury: a review.

Authors:  B M Carlson; J A Faulkner
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 5.411

6.  Enzyme histochemical and histographic data on normal human facial muscles.

Authors:  S Schwarting; M Schröder; E Stennert; H H Goebel
Journal:  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 1.538

7.  Cranio-maxillofacial trauma: a 10 year review of 9,543 cases with 21,067 injuries.

Authors:  Robert Gassner; Tarkan Tuli; Oliver Hächl; Ansgar Rudisch; Hanno Ulmer
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 8.  Facial reconstruction by biosurgery: cell transplantation versus cell homing.

Authors:  Jeremy J Mao; Michael S Stosich; Eduardo K Moioli; Chang Hun Lee; Susan Y Fu; Barbara Bastian; Sidney B Eisig; Candice Zemnick; Jeffrey Ascherman; June Wu; Christine Rohde; Jeffrey Ahn
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 6.389

Review 9.  Smile restoration for permanent facial paralysis.

Authors:  Jonathan Leckenby; Adriaan Grobbelaar
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2013-09-13

10.  The superficial musculoaponeurotic system of the face: a model explored.

Authors:  M Broughton; G M Fyfe
Journal:  Anat Res Int       Date:  2013-11-04
View more
  5 in total

1.  Repairing Volumetric Muscle Loss in the Ovine Peroneus Tertius Following a 3-Month Recovery.

Authors:  Stoyna S Novakova; Brittany L Rodriguez; Emmanuel E Vega-Soto; Genevieve P Nutter; Rachel E Armstrong; Peter C D Macpherson; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 3.845

2.  Repairing Volumetric Muscle Loss in the Ovine Peroneus Tertius Following a 6-Month Recovery.

Authors:  Brittany L Rodriguez; Stoyna S Novakova; Emmanuel E Vega-Soto; Genevieve P Nutter; Peter C D Macpherson; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 4.080

3.  Impact of Cell Seeding Density and Cell Confluence on Human Tissue Engineered Skeletal Muscle.

Authors:  Olga M Wroblewski; Matthew H Nguyen; Paul S Cederna; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 4.080

Review 4.  Distinct Embryonic Origin and Injury Response of Resident Stem Cells in Craniofacial Muscles.

Authors:  Xu Cheng; Bing Shi; Jingtao Li
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 4.566

5.  Impact of Human Epidermal Growth Factor on Tissue-Engineered Skeletal Muscle Structure and Function.

Authors:  Olga M Wroblewski; Emmanuel E Vega-Soto; Matthew H Nguyen; Paul S Cederna; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 4.080

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.