Cargando…
Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli
BACKGROUND: Cell migration is a vital process for growth and repair. In vitro migration assays, utilized to study cell migration, often rely on physical scraping of a cell monolayer to induce cell migration. The physical act of scrape injury results in numerous factors stimulating cell migration – s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4606904/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26473009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13036-015-0015-y |
_version_ | 1782395439923855360 |
---|---|
author | Ammann, Kaitlyn R. DeCook, Katrina J. Tran, Phat L. Merkle, Valerie M. Wong, Pak K. Slepian, Marvin J. |
author_facet | Ammann, Kaitlyn R. DeCook, Katrina J. Tran, Phat L. Merkle, Valerie M. Wong, Pak K. Slepian, Marvin J. |
author_sort | Ammann, Kaitlyn R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cell migration is a vital process for growth and repair. In vitro migration assays, utilized to study cell migration, often rely on physical scraping of a cell monolayer to induce cell migration. The physical act of scrape injury results in numerous factors stimulating cell migration – some injury-related, some solely due to gap creation and loss of contact inhibition. Eliminating the effects of cell injury would be useful to examine the relative contribution of injury versus other mechanisms to cell migration. Cell exclusion assays can tease out the effects of injury and have become a new avenue for migration studies. Here, we developed two simple non-injury techniques for cell exclusion: 1) a Pyrex® cylinder - for outward migration of cells and 2) a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) insert - for inward migration of cells. Utilizing these assays smooth muscle cells (SMCs) and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) migratory behavior was studied on both polystyrene and gelatin-coated surfaces. RESULTS: Differences in migratory behavior could be detected for both smooth muscle cells (SMCs) and endothelial cells (ECs) when utilizing injury versus non-injury assays. SMCs migrated faster than HUVECs when stimulated by injury in the scrape wound assay, with rates of 1.26 % per hour and 1.59 % per hour on polystyrene and gelatin surfaces, respectively. The fastest overall migration took place with HUVECs on a gelatin-coated surface, with the in-growth assay, at a rate of 2.05 % per hour. The slowest migration occurred with the same conditions but on a polystyrene surface at a rate of 0.33 % per hour. CONCLUSION: For SMCs, injury is a dominating factor in migration when compared to the two cell exclusion assays, regardless of the surface tested: polystyrene or gelatin. In contrast, the migrating surface, namely gelatin, was a dominating factor for HUVEC migration, providing an increase in cell migration over the polystyrene surface. Overall, the cell exclusion assays - the in-growth and out-growth assays, provide a means to determine pure migratory behavior of cells in comparison to migration confounded by cell wounding and injury. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13036-015-0015-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4606904 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46069042015-10-16 Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli Ammann, Kaitlyn R. DeCook, Katrina J. Tran, Phat L. Merkle, Valerie M. Wong, Pak K. Slepian, Marvin J. J Biol Eng Research BACKGROUND: Cell migration is a vital process for growth and repair. In vitro migration assays, utilized to study cell migration, often rely on physical scraping of a cell monolayer to induce cell migration. The physical act of scrape injury results in numerous factors stimulating cell migration – some injury-related, some solely due to gap creation and loss of contact inhibition. Eliminating the effects of cell injury would be useful to examine the relative contribution of injury versus other mechanisms to cell migration. Cell exclusion assays can tease out the effects of injury and have become a new avenue for migration studies. Here, we developed two simple non-injury techniques for cell exclusion: 1) a Pyrex® cylinder - for outward migration of cells and 2) a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) insert - for inward migration of cells. Utilizing these assays smooth muscle cells (SMCs) and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) migratory behavior was studied on both polystyrene and gelatin-coated surfaces. RESULTS: Differences in migratory behavior could be detected for both smooth muscle cells (SMCs) and endothelial cells (ECs) when utilizing injury versus non-injury assays. SMCs migrated faster than HUVECs when stimulated by injury in the scrape wound assay, with rates of 1.26 % per hour and 1.59 % per hour on polystyrene and gelatin surfaces, respectively. The fastest overall migration took place with HUVECs on a gelatin-coated surface, with the in-growth assay, at a rate of 2.05 % per hour. The slowest migration occurred with the same conditions but on a polystyrene surface at a rate of 0.33 % per hour. CONCLUSION: For SMCs, injury is a dominating factor in migration when compared to the two cell exclusion assays, regardless of the surface tested: polystyrene or gelatin. In contrast, the migrating surface, namely gelatin, was a dominating factor for HUVEC migration, providing an increase in cell migration over the polystyrene surface. Overall, the cell exclusion assays - the in-growth and out-growth assays, provide a means to determine pure migratory behavior of cells in comparison to migration confounded by cell wounding and injury. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13036-015-0015-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4606904/ /pubmed/26473009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13036-015-0015-y Text en © Ammann et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Ammann, Kaitlyn R. DeCook, Katrina J. Tran, Phat L. Merkle, Valerie M. Wong, Pak K. Slepian, Marvin J. Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title | Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title_full | Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title_fullStr | Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title_full_unstemmed | Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title_short | Collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
title_sort | collective cell migration of smooth muscle and endothelial cells: impact of injury versus non-injury stimuli |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4606904/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26473009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13036-015-0015-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ammannkaitlynr collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli AT decookkatrinaj collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli AT tranphatl collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli AT merklevaleriem collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli AT wongpakk collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli AT slepianmarvinj collectivecellmigrationofsmoothmuscleandendothelialcellsimpactofinjuryversusnoninjurystimuli |