Connective tissue research · 2025
Peripheral nerve repair using olfactory ensheathing and stem cells within a vein graft.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McMonagle Brent A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess nerve regeneration in vein grafts filled with olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) or olfactory stem cells (ONSs) in a 15 mm gap male DA rat sciatic nerve model versus autografts.
METHODS: The control group (NG) received a nerve graft reversed and sutured into the 15 mm gap; all of the animals in the five experimental groups received a vein graft to bridge the 15 mm gap filled with extracellular matrix (ECM- MatrigelTM) only (VG); ECM with rat OECs suspended in ECM (VG + rOECs); ECM with human OECs (with Cyclosporin postoperatively to prevent graft rejection) (VG + hONS (c)); ECM only (with Cyclosporin postoperatively as a control for the previous group) (VG (c)); and ECM with rat ONSs within the vein grafts (VG + rONS). After 12 weeks ±4 days, electrophysiological analysis (latency and amplitude) and histological assessment of axon counts (immunohistochemistry with neurofilament [NF] stain) were undertaken.
RESULTS: Group VG + rOECs had the lowest latency results, NG had the highest amplitude results, and groups NG and VG + rOECs had significantly higher axon counts.
CONCLUSIONS: The results trended toward the VG + rOECs and NG groups having the most successful electrophysiology results and axon counts. Incorporating OECs into vein grafts may be a viable alternative to nerve grafts for peripheral nerve repair.
METHODS: The control group (NG) received a nerve graft reversed and sutured into the 15 mm gap; all of the animals in the five experimental groups received a vein graft to bridge the 15 mm gap filled with extracellular matrix (ECM- MatrigelTM) only (VG); ECM with rat OECs suspended in ECM (VG + rOECs); ECM with human OECs (with Cyclosporin postoperatively to prevent graft rejection) (VG + hONS (c)); ECM only (with Cyclosporin postoperatively as a control for the previous group) (VG (c)); and ECM with rat ONSs within the vein grafts (VG + rONS). After 12 weeks ±4 days, electrophysiological analysis (latency and amplitude) and histological assessment of axon counts (immunohistochemistry with neurofilament [NF] stain) were undertaken.
RESULTS: Group VG + rOECs had the lowest latency results, NG had the highest amplitude results, and groups NG and VG + rOECs had significantly higher axon counts.
CONCLUSIONS: The results trended toward the VG + rOECs and NG groups having the most successful electrophysiology results and axon counts. Incorporating OECs into vein grafts may be a viable alternative to nerve grafts for peripheral nerve repair.