| Literature DB >> 31739778 |
Endre Soreide1,2,3, Janet M Denbeigh1, Eric A Lewallen1,4, Roman Thaler1, Rebekah M Samsonraj1, Dakota L Jones5, Wei Xu1,6, Dirk Larson7, Lars Nordsletten2,3, Sanjeev Kakar8, Andre J van Wijnen9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Injuries in the musculoskeletal system, such as tendon and ligament ruptures, are challenging to manage and often require surgical reconstructions with limited long-term success. Thus, characterizations of these tissues are urgently needed to better understand cellular mechanisms that regulate tissue homeostasis and healing. Explant culturing systems allow for ex vivo analysis of tissues in an environment that mimics the native microenvironment in vivo.Entities:
Keywords: Ex vivo; Explant culture; Ligament; Musculoskeletal tissue; Tendon; Tissue engineering
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31739778 PMCID: PMC6862789 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-2896-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1(a) Breakdown of culture and device experimental conditions designed to isolate the effects of culture and loading conditions, (b) tissue sample groups, and (c) timeline of experiments
Fig. 2(a) A lateral view diagram of the tension device components depicting a chosen weight applying tension to the tissue via a suture. (b) A photographic image of the wells arranged in parallel to allow side-by-side experimental manipulations. (c) A close-up view of one tissue culture well containing a rabbit semitendinosus tendon secured to the device by suture and base hook. (d) A close-up view of the custom-made mesh for tendon culture. Scale in cm
Fig. 3RT-qPCR data from samples cultured in unloaded conditions. Gene-Mania analysis depicting clear clustering of gene expression data by unloaded culture condition (control, mesh dish, or device with 0 g)
Fig. 4Box and whisker plots of gene expression levels (obtained by RT-qPCR) that allow comparison of samples collected from different culture conditions
P-values comparing unloaded culture conditions to flash frozen tendon samples.
| Adjusted (FDR) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GeneID | Overall | Mesh vs Control | Mesh vs Weight - 0 g | Control vs Weight - 0 g |
| Gapdh | ||||
| Hprt | 0.3417 | |||
| Col1a1 | 0.6945 | |||
| Col10a1 | 0.8593 | |||
| Col3a1 | 0.4104 | |||
| Col5a1 | 0.2222 | |||
| Tnc | 0.6462 | |||
| Dcn | 0.8955 | |||
| Fn1 | 0.5505 | |||
| Acan | 0.1984 | – | ||
| Hapln1 | 0.0910 | 0.8492 | 0.0815 | 0.0815 |
| Alpl | 0.9496 | |||
| Ibsp | 0.3069 | |||
| Spp1 | 0.2975 | |||
| Mmp1 | 0.9589 | |||
| Mmp10 | 0.9834 | |||
| Mmp13 | 0.9581 | |||
| Mmp3 | 0.1048 | |||
| Acta1 | 0.9055 | |||
| Adamts4 | 0.7149 | |||
Bold text indicate all comparisons that yielded significant (p < 0.05) or marginally significant (p < 0.06, italicized) differences between experimental groups. FDR False discovery rate
Fig. 5Venn diagrams showing median fold change comparisons among treatments that differed only by culture condition as compared to flash frozen control tissue
Fig. 6RT-qPCR results comparing loaded culture conditions using Gene-Mania for clustering
Fig. 7Box and whisker plots of gene expression levels (obtained by RT-qPCR) that allow comparison of samples collected from different device conditions
P-values comparing device tension conditions.
| Adjusted (FDR) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GeneID | Overall | 0 g vs. 12 g | 0 g vs. 21 g | 12 g vs. 21 g |
| Gapdh | 0.1742 | – | – | – |
| Hprt | 0.0971 | 0.0992 | 0.0992 | 0.9260 |
| Col1a1 | 0.4201 | – | – | – |
| Col10a1 | 0.5014 | – | – | – |
| Col3a1 | 0.6727 | – | – | – |
| Col5a1 | 0.5088 | – | – | – |
| Tnc | 0.0868 | 0.1742 | 0.0882 | 0.4345 |
| Dnc | 0.2713 | – | – | – |
| Fn1 | 0.3102 | – | – | – |
| Acan | 0.6376 | – | – | – |
| Hapln1 | 0.5276 | |||
| Alpl | 0.2062 | – | – | – |
| Ibsp | 0.9203 | |||
| Spp1 | 0.5607 | – | – | – |
| Mmp1 | 0.6833 | |||
| Mmp10 | 0.1277 | 0.3035 | ||
| Mmp13 | 0.6988 | |||
| Mmp3 | 0.3695 | – | – | – |
| Acta1 | 0.1329 | – | – | – |
| Adamts4 | 0.6580 | |||
Bold text indicates all comparisons that yielded significant (p < 0.05) or marginally significant (p < 0.06, italicized) differences between experimental groups. FDR False discovery rate
Fig. 8Venn diagrams comparing changes in gene expression for the device tension conditions, with fold changes for 12 g and 21 g weights relative to 0 g