Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23672649›Full record

ArticleTissue engineering. Part A2013

In vitro development and characterization of a tissue-engineered conduit resembling esophageal wall using human and pig skeletal myoblast, oral epithelial cells, and biologic scaffolds.

Tigran Poghosyan, Sebastien Gaujoux, Valerie Vanneaux, Patrick Bruneval, Thomas Domet, Severine Lecourt, Mohamed Jarraya, Rony Sfeir, Jerome Larghero, Pierre Cattan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tissue engineering. Part A, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Bioengineering the gut: future prospects of regenerative medicine.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2016
    Review
  9. Tubular organ epithelialisation.Journal of tissue engineering
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tigran PoghosyanCell Therapy Unit and Clinical Investigation Center in Biotherapies (CIC-BT501), Saint-Louis Hospital, AP-HP Paris, France .
Sebastien Gaujoux
Valerie Vanneaux
Patrick Bruneval
Thomas Domet
Severine Lecourt
Mohamed Jarraya
Rony Sfeir
Jerome Larghero
Pierre Cattan
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTissue engineering represents a promising approach for esophageal replacement, considering the complexity and drawbacks of conventional techniques.

aimTo create the components necessary to reconstruct in vitro or in vivo an esophageal wall, we analyzed the feasibility and the optimal conditions of human and pig skeletal myoblast (HSM and PSM) and porcine oral epithelial cell (OEC) culture on biologic scaffolds. MATERIALS AND

methodsPSM and HSM were isolated from striated muscle and porcine OECs were extracted from oral mucosa biopsies. Myoblasts were seeded on an acellular scaffold issue from porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) and OEC on decellularized human amniotic membrane (HAM). Seeding conditions (cell concentrations [0.5×10(6) versus 10(6) cells/cm(2)] and culture periods [7, 14 and 21 days]), were analyzed using the methyl thiazoltetrazolium assay, quantitative PCR, flow cytometry, and immunohistochemistry.

resultsPhenotypic stability was observed after cellular expansion for PSM and HSM (85% and 97% CD56-positive cells, respectively), and OECs (90% AE1/AE3- positive cells). After PSM and HSM seeding, quantities of viable cells were similar whatever the initial cell concentration used and remained stable at all time points. During cell culture on SIS, a decrease of CD56-positive cells was observed (76% and 76% by D7, 56% and 70% by D14, 28% and 60% by D21, for PSM and HSM, respectively). Multilayered surface of α-actin smooth muscle and Desmine-positive cells organized in bundles was seen as soon as D7, with no evidence of cell within the SIS. Myoblasts fusion was observed at D21. Pax3 and Pax7 expression was downregulated and MyoD expression upregulated, at D14.OEC proliferation was observed on HAM with both cell concentrations from D7 to D21. The cell metabolism activity was more important on matrix seeded by 10(6) cells/cm(2). With 0.5×10(6) OEC/cm(2), a single layer of pancytokeratin-positive cells was seen at D7, which became pluristratified by D14, while when 10(6) OEC/cm(2) were used, a pluristratified epithelial structure was seen as soon as D7. Proliferative cells (Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen staining) were mainly located at the basal layer.

conclusionIn this model, the optimal conditions of cell seeding in terms of cell concentration and culture duration were 0.5×10(6) myoblasts/cm(2) and 10(6) OEC/cm(2), and 7 days.

Indexed as

AnimalsCells, CulturedEpithelial CellsEsophagusHumansMyoblastsSwineTissue EngineeringTissue Scaffolds

Identifiers

PMID23672649
PMCPMC3761407
OpenAlexW2061089781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.