Acta ophthalmologica · 2014
Regeneration of corneal epithelium utilizing a collagen vitrigel membrane in rabbit models for corneal stromal wound and limbal stem cell deficiency.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Chae J Jeremy, Ambrose Winnette McIntosh, Espinoza Freddy A, Mulreany Daniel G, Ng Shengyong, Takezawa Toshiaki, Trexler Morgana M, Schein Oliver D, Chuck Roy S, Elisseeff Jennifer H
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study was performed to evaluate the potential of a collagen-based membrane, collagen vitrigel (CV), for reconstructing corneal epithelium in the stromal wound and limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) models.
METHODS: Three groups of rabbits were used in the stromal wound model: CV affixed using fibrin glue (CV + FG group, n = 9), fibrin glue only (FG group, n = 3) and an untreated control group (n = 3). In the LSCD model, one group received CV containing human limbal epithelial cells (CV + hLEC group, n = 2) and the other was an untreated control (n = 1). Gross observation, including fluorescent staining, pathological examination, immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy, was used to evaluate the effect of CV on the corneal epithelium.
RESULTS: In the stromal wound model, fluorescent staining showed that epithelial reconstruction occurred as rapidly in the CV + FG group as it did in the control group. The pathological examination proved that the CV supported a healthy corneal epithelium in the CV + FG group, whereas FG led to hypertrophy and inappropriate differentiation of corneal epithelium in the FG group. In the LSCD model, the corneas in the CV + hLEC group showed sustained tissue transparency with good epithelialization, low inflammatory response and reduced neovascularization. However, the control cornea was translucent and showed high amounts of inflammation and neovascularization.
CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that CV supports corneal epithelial differentiation and prevents epithelial hypertrophy, in addition to serving as a scaffold for hLEC transplantation, without complications.
METHODS: Three groups of rabbits were used in the stromal wound model: CV affixed using fibrin glue (CV + FG group, n = 9), fibrin glue only (FG group, n = 3) and an untreated control group (n = 3). In the LSCD model, one group received CV containing human limbal epithelial cells (CV + hLEC group, n = 2) and the other was an untreated control (n = 1). Gross observation, including fluorescent staining, pathological examination, immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy, was used to evaluate the effect of CV on the corneal epithelium.
RESULTS: In the stromal wound model, fluorescent staining showed that epithelial reconstruction occurred as rapidly in the CV + FG group as it did in the control group. The pathological examination proved that the CV supported a healthy corneal epithelium in the CV + FG group, whereas FG led to hypertrophy and inappropriate differentiation of corneal epithelium in the FG group. In the LSCD model, the corneas in the CV + hLEC group showed sustained tissue transparency with good epithelialization, low inflammatory response and reduced neovascularization. However, the control cornea was translucent and showed high amounts of inflammation and neovascularization.
CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that CV supports corneal epithelial differentiation and prevents epithelial hypertrophy, in addition to serving as a scaffold for hLEC transplantation, without complications.