ArticleResearch square2024
A Dynamic Flow Fetal Membrane Organ-on-a-Chip System for Modeling the Effects of Amniotic Fluid Motion.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fetal membrane(amniochorion), the innermost lining of the intrauterine cavity, surround the fetus and enclose amniotic fluid. Unlike unidirectional blood flow, amniotic fluid subtly rocks back and forth, and thus, the innermost amnion epithelial cells are continuously exposed to low levels of shear stress from fluid undulation. Here, we tested the impact of fluid motion on amnion epithelial cells (AECs) as a bearer of force impact and their potential vulnerability to cytopathologic changes that can destabilize fetal membrane functions. An amnion membrane (AM) organ-on-chip (OOC) was utilized to culture human fetal amnion membrane cells. The applied flow was modulated to perfuse culture media back and forth for 48 hours flow culture to mimic fluid motion. Static culture condition was used as a negative control, and oxidative stress (OS) condition was used as a positive control for pathophysiological changes. The impacts of fluidic motion were evaluated by measuring cell viability, cellular transition, and inflammation. Additionally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging was performed to observe microvilli formation. The results show that regardless of the applied flow rate, AECs and AMCs maintained their viability, morphology, innate meta-state, and low production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. E-cadherin expression and microvilli formation in the AECs were upregulated in a flow rate-dependent fashion; however, this did not impact cellular morphology or cellular transition or inflammation. OS treatment induced a mesenchymal morphology, significantly higher vimentin to CK-18 ratio, and pro-inflammatory cytokine production in AECs, whereas AMCs did not respond in any significant manner. Fluid motion and shear stress, if any, did not impact AEC cell function and did not cause inflammation. Thus, when using an amnion membrane OOC model, the inclusion of a flow culture environment is not necessary to mimic any
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.