| Literature DB >> 33171654 |
Peer W Kämmerer1,2, Vivien Engel2, Franz Plocksties3, Anika Jonitz-Heincke4, Dirk Timmermann3, Nadja Engel2, Bernhard Frerich2, Rainer Bader4, Daniel G E Thiem1, Anna Skorska5,6, Robert David5,6, Bilal Al-Nawas1, Michael Dau2.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to establish electrical stimulation parameters in order to improve cell growth and viability of human adipose-derived stem cells (hADSC) when compared to non-stimulated cells in vitro. hADSC were exposed to continuous electrical stimulation with 1.7 V AC/20 Hz. After 24, 72 h and 7 days, cell number, cellular surface coverage and cell proliferation were assessed. In addition, cell cycle analysis was carried out after 3 and 7 days. After 24 h, no significant alterations were observed for stimulated cells. At day 3, stimulated cells showed a 4.5-fold increase in cell numbers, a 2.7-fold increase in cellular surface coverage and a significantly increased proliferation. Via cell cycle analysis, a significant increase in the G2/M phase was monitored for stimulated cells. Contrastingly, after 7 days, the non-stimulated group exhibited a 11-fold increase in cell numbers and a 4-fold increase in cellular surface coverage as well as a significant increase in cell proliferation. Moreover, the stimulated cells displayed a shift to the G1 and sub-G1 phase, indicating for metabolic arrest and apoptosis initiation. In accordance, continuous electrical stimulation of hADSC led to a significantly increased cell growth and proliferation after 3 days. However, longer stimulation periods such as 7 days caused an opposite result indicating initiation of apoptosis.Entities:
Keywords: alternating current; continuous stimulation; electrical stimulation; human adipose-derived stem cells; proliferation; tissue engineering
Year: 2020 PMID: 33171654 PMCID: PMC7695310 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines8110482
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomedicines ISSN: 2227-9059
Figure 1Experimental setup showing stimulated and non-stimulated adipose-derived stem cells seeded on coverslips with electrodes.
Figure 2Proof of osteogenic differentiation. (A): Osteogenic differentiation of the adiopose-derived stem cells was monitored by Alizarin red staining to identify calcium deposits in a time series. All isolated stem cells were able to differentiate into osteoblasts in time range of 20–30 days. (B): Immunohistological staining of the osteogenesis markers collagen I, sialoprotein and osteopontin (green fluorescence) counterstained with Hoechst (blue) to label the nuclei of the adiopose-derived stem cells after 2 weeks. In the undifferentiated control group, no expression markers were seen.
Figure 3Evaluation of cell number and cellular surface coverage of adipose-derived stem cells electrically stimulated (left) and non-stimulated (right) at day 3 (original magnification ×100).
Figure 4Boxplots for illustration of cell numbers in stimulated and non-stimulated cell samples after 24 h, 3 and 7 days of continuous electrical stimulation. At days 3 and 7, significant differences were seen (each p < 0.001).
Figure 5Boxplots for illustration of cellular surface coverage in stimulated and non-stimulated cell samples after 24 h, 3 and 7 days of continuous electrical stimulation. At days 3 and 7, significant differences were seen (each p < 0.001).
Figure 6Evaluation of cell number and cellular surface coverage of adipose-derived stem cells electrically stimulated (4A) and non-stimulated (4B) at day 7 (original magnification ×100).
Figure 7Boxplots for illustration of the proliferation/relative metabolic activity in stimulated and non-stimulated cell samples after 24 h, 3 and 7 days of continuous electrical stimulation. At day 3, the proliferation was doubled in the stimulated cells and in contrast, at day 7 this was doubled in the controls while the stimulated cells reduced their proliferation rate.
Figure 8Histograms illustrating differences in the cell cycle phases after 3 and 7 days for stimulated and non-stimulated (control) cells.
Distribution of cells within three phases of the cell cycle. Here, after three days, electrical stimulation led to a higher shift of stimulated cells (“stimulation”) in S and G2/M phases when compared to non-stimulated controls (“control”). After seven days of electrical stimulation, an adverse effect was seen.
| Time | G0/G1 | S | G2/M | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 d | Control | 71.1 ± 6.8 | 8.4 ± 3.1 | 19.7 ± 5.7 |
| Stimulation | 48.6 ± 8.8 | 15.3 ± 6.7 | 35.2 ± 9.6 | |
| 7 d | Control | 70.1 ± 5.8 | 6.5 ± 4.8 | 22.0 ± 4.7 |
| Stimulation | 88.8 ± 7.2 | 0.3 ± 2.3 | 10.4 ± 5.9 |
Figure 9Analysis of the sub-G1 phase for the measurement of apoptotic cell via flow cytometry. After 7 days of electric stimulation, cell cycle analysis revealed a significant increase in the apoptotic cells.