The British journal of ophthalmology · 2014
Use of human serum for human corneal endothelial cell culture.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Vianna Lucas Monferrari Monteiro, Kallay Laura, Toyono Tetsuya, Belfort Rubens, Holiman Jeffrey D, Jun Albert S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To study human corneal endothelial cells (HCECs) cultured in vitro with human serum (HS) supplemented media (HS-SM) compared with HCEC cultured in fetal bovine serum (FBS) supplemented media (FBS-SM).
METHODS: One cornea from a donor aged 21 years and a pair of corneas from a 16 year-old donor were obtained from the eye bank and used to create two different cell populations. At the first passage, the cell populations were equally divided and seeded in two different wells containing FBS-SM or HS-SM. In subsequent passages, HS-SM was compared with FBS-SM by morphology, growth curves, immunohistochemistry and real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR for endothelial cell markers.
RESULTS: No difference in morphology could be seen in P2, P5 or in any other passages for cells grown in the two media. By growth curves, cell counts were similar in FBS-SM and HS-SM from days 1 to 5, with a trend towards higher cell counts in HS-SM at day 7. Cells grown in FBS-SM and HS-SM media showed similar expression of endothelial cell markers when assessed by immunohistochemistry and real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR.
CONCLUSIONS: HS-SM was similar to FBS-SM for HCEC culture when assessed by cell morphology, proliferation and protein/gene expression.
METHODS: One cornea from a donor aged 21 years and a pair of corneas from a 16 year-old donor were obtained from the eye bank and used to create two different cell populations. At the first passage, the cell populations were equally divided and seeded in two different wells containing FBS-SM or HS-SM. In subsequent passages, HS-SM was compared with FBS-SM by morphology, growth curves, immunohistochemistry and real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR for endothelial cell markers.
RESULTS: No difference in morphology could be seen in P2, P5 or in any other passages for cells grown in the two media. By growth curves, cell counts were similar in FBS-SM and HS-SM from days 1 to 5, with a trend towards higher cell counts in HS-SM at day 7. Cells grown in FBS-SM and HS-SM media showed similar expression of endothelial cell markers when assessed by immunohistochemistry and real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR.
CONCLUSIONS: HS-SM was similar to FBS-SM for HCEC culture when assessed by cell morphology, proliferation and protein/gene expression.