muscle acellular scaffold as a biomaterial: effects on c2c12 cell differentiation andinteraction with the murine host environment
Clicks: 329
ID: 159576
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
329 views
65 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #93 of 461 articles by views in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 461 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The extracellular matrix (ECM) of decellularized organs possesses the characteristics of the idealtissue-engineering scaffold (i.e. histocompatibility, porosity, degradability, non-toxicity). Wepreviously observed that the muscle acellular scaffold (MAS) is a pro-myogenic environment invivo. In order to determine whether MAS, which is basically muscle ECM, behaves as a myogenicenvironment, regardless of its location, we analysed MAS interaction with both muscle and nonmusclecells and tissues, to assess the effects of MAS on cell differentiation. Bone morphogeneticprotein treatment of C2C12 cells cultured within MAS induced osteogenic differentiation in vitro,thus suggesting that MAS does not irreversibly commit cells to myogenesis. In vivo MAS supportedformation of nascent muscle fibres when replacing a muscle (orthotopic position). However,heterotopically grafted MAS did not give rise to muscle fibres when transplanted within the renalcapsule. Also, no muscle formation was observed when MAS was transplanted under the xiphoidprocess, in spite of the abundant presence of cells migrating along the laminin-based MASstructure. Taken together, our results suggest that MAS itself is not sufficient to induce myogenicdifferentiation. It is likely that the pro-myogenic environment of MAS is not strictly related to theintrinsic properties of the muscle scaffold (e.g. specific muscle ECM proteins). Indeed, it is morelikely that myogenic stem cells colonising MAS recognise a muscle environment that ultimatelyallows terminal myogenic differentiation. In conclusion, MAS may represent a suitableenvironment for muscle and non-muscle 3D constructs characterised by a highly organised structurewhose relative stability promotes integration with the surrounding tissues. Our work highlights theplasticity of MAS, suggesting that it may be possible to consider MAS for a wider range of tissueengineering applications than the mere replacement of volumetric muscle loss.
| Reference Key |
ebarbara2014frontiersmuscle
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Perniconi eBarbara;Perniconi eBarbara;Dario eColetti;Dario eColetti;Paola eAulino;Paola eAulino;Alessandra eCosta;Alessandra eCosta;Paola eAprile;Paola eAprile;Luigi eSantacroce;Ernesto eChiaravalloti;Laura eCoquelin;Nathalie eChevallier;Laura eTeodori;Sergio eAdamo;Massimo eMarrelli;Massimo eMarrelli;Marco eTatullo;Marco eTatullo |
| Journal | Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fphys.2014.00354
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.