ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2008
In vitro culturing of porcine tracheal mucosa as an ideal model for investigating the influence of drugs on human respiratory mucosa.
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of airway porcine epithelial cells as an alternative to human in vitro preclinical studies.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Rock Inhibitor Y-27632 Enables Feeder-Free, Unlimited Expansion ofStem cells international · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been previously shown that fresh mucosa from different mammals could serve as raw material for in vitro culturing with the differentiation of cilia, which are the most important morphological structures for the function of the mucociliary system. Increasing legal restrictions on the removal of human tissue and changing surgical techniques have led to a lack of fresh human mucosa for culturing. Most of the animals that have been used as donors up to now are genetically not very close to human beings and must all be sacrificed for such studies. We, therefore, established a modified system of culturing mucosa cells from the trachea of pigs, which is available as a regular by-product after slaughtering. With respect to the possibility of developing "beating" cilia, it could be shown that the speed of cell proliferation until adhesion to the coated culture dishes, the formation of conjunctions of cell clusters and the proliferation of cilia were comparable for porcine and human mucosa. Moreover, it could be demonstrated that the porcine cilia beat frequency of 7.57 +/- 1.39 Hz was comparable to the human mucosa cells beat frequency of 7.3 +/- 1.4 Hz and that this beat frequency was absolutely constant over the investigation time of 360 min. In order to prove whether the reaction to different drugs is comparable between the porcine and human cilia, we initially tested benzalkonium chloride, which is known to be toxic for human cells, followed by naphazoline, which we found in previous studies on human mucosa to be non-toxic. The results clearly showed that the functional and morphological reactions of the porcine ciliated cells to these substances were similar to the reaction we found in the in vitro cultured human mucosa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.