MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4235584950 · doi:10.1111/j.1582-4934.2010.01202.x

Re: Moving towards <i>in situ</i> tracheal regeneration: the bionic tissue engineered transplantation approach <i>J. Cell. Mol. Med.</i> Vol. 14, No. 7, 2010, pp. 1877–1889

2010· letter· en· W4235584950 sur OpenAlexaff
Siba Haykal, Thomas K. Waddell, Stefan O.P. Hofer

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine · 2010
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTracheal and airway disorders
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDecellularizationTissue engineeringRegenerative medicineRegeneration (biology)TransplantationExtracellular matrixCartilageMesenchymal stem cellBiomedical engineeringPathologyStem cellAnatomyCell biologyMedicineBiologySurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Malignancy, subglottic stenosis and traumatic injury to the trachea require surgical resection. When short segments are involved, primary re-anastomosis affords excellent results. Longer lesions, involving more than half of the tracheal length in adults or one third of the tracheal length in children, require novel solutions for surgical repair. In this paper, Bader and Macchiarini review the history of tracheal reconstruction, the failed attempts at tracheal replacements using prosthetic materials, autografts and allografts and the problems faced with reepithelialization, revascularization, maintenance of cartilage integrity and immunogenicity. More specifically, they describe their regenerative approach to tracheal replacement involving the use of an ‘immunotolerant’ decellularized donor trachea repopulated with recipient mesenchymal stem cell derived chondrocytes and bronchial epithelial cells using a manufactured bioreactor and more recently, the bionic airway tissue-engineered replacement. This tissue-engineered tracheal approach shows great promise; however, a few concepts surrounding methodology should be questioned. Decellularized tissues/ organs have been widely used to yield natural scaffolds for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine purposes. Decellularization literature implies that an ideal decellularization technique is tissue/organ specific, includes a combination of physical, chemical and enzymatic approach allowing lysis of cell membrane, separation and solubilization of cellular components and removal of cellular debris [1]. This needs to be accomplished without significant disruption to the extracellular matrix (ECM) components in order to maintain biochemical composition, morphology and behaviour of the tissue/ organ. Sodium deoxycholate, an ionic detergent, was initially used to isolate pure kidney glomerular, tubular, retinal and brain blood vessel basement membranes. Autolysis of the tissue with distilled water and a treatment with DNAse were necessary to prevent agglutination of the tissue upon contact with this detergent [2]. Despite the authors’ claim of the efficiency of this detergent in both porcine jejunal segment [3] and tracheal decellularization in comparison with other protocols, quantification of ECM components such as glycosaminoglycans, collagen, elastin and laminin before and after decellularization would be helpful in establishing its true efficacy at maintaining tracheal structure. The preservation of function of decellularized organs is a key concept in this area of research. Repetitive cycles of their detergent-enzymatic method, ranging from 17 cycles for porcine tracheas to 25 cycles for human tracheas, allowed for preservation of biomechanical strength and induced loss of antigenicity. Structural integrity of these tracheal grafts was measured only by using a tensile-test device and exposing tracheas to increasing uniaxial force where, the tracheal rupture point was measured [4]. Clinically important characteristics of tracheal function are more dependent on tracheal collapsibility and studies should probably focus on measuring tracheal compliance instead. In addition, immunogenicity of tracheal grafts in this porcine model was assessed by using immunohistochemical methods to determine the number of cycles required, in combination with the expression of an inflammatory marker and the development of anti-pig leucocyte antigen antibodies in mice implanted with porcine bioengineered tracheas [4]. Immunogenicity in their clinical transplantation was assessed by immunostaining for Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I (MHCI) and Major Histocompatibility Complex Class II (MHCII) markers on tracheal sections following decellularization [5]. The authors also do not comment on immune response directed to recellularized tracheal allografts despite the growing evidence of the immunomodulatory role of mesenchymal stem cells [6]. Theoretically, ECM components are considered to be conserved between species and individuals; however, inflammatory reactions and hyperacute rejection to these natural scaffolds have been reported [7] and traditional histological methods are far too simplistic to predict long term remodelling outcome. Finally, the authors propose bionic airway tissue-engineered replacement, to avoid in vitro cell seeding and culture of these cells within a bioreactor before surgical implantation. Despite having been quoted by the authors to have important advantages for regulatory, financial and clinical sustainability of tissue engineering technologies, it should be noted that this method has not been attempted in their animal model and the fate of the mesenchymal stromal cells and epithelial cells seeded on these grafts has yet to be determined. Importantly, this paper nicely reviews the concept of producing immunotolerant tissues/organs for transplantation and extends the promise for applications of regenerative and tissue-engineered therapies. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,006
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,019

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,222
Écart entre enseignants0,213 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Cellular and Molecular MedicineMême sujetTracheal and airway disordersTravaux en français237 207