Cargando…

Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response

Stem cell therapy for the treatment of tendon injury is an emerging clinical practice in the fields of human and veterinary sports medicine; however, the therapeutic benefit of intralesional transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells in tendonitis cases is not well designed. Questions persist regardi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bowers, Kristin, Amelse, Lisa, Bow, Austin, Newby, Steven, MacDonald, Amber, Sun, Xiaocun, Anderson, David, Dhar, Madhu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9404841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36004932
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9080407
_version_ 1784773733217468416
author Bowers, Kristin
Amelse, Lisa
Bow, Austin
Newby, Steven
MacDonald, Amber
Sun, Xiaocun
Anderson, David
Dhar, Madhu
author_facet Bowers, Kristin
Amelse, Lisa
Bow, Austin
Newby, Steven
MacDonald, Amber
Sun, Xiaocun
Anderson, David
Dhar, Madhu
author_sort Bowers, Kristin
collection PubMed
description Stem cell therapy for the treatment of tendon injury is an emerging clinical practice in the fields of human and veterinary sports medicine; however, the therapeutic benefit of intralesional transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells in tendonitis cases is not well designed. Questions persist regarding the overall tenogenic potential and efficacy of this treatment alone. In this study, we aimed to isolate a rat mesenchymal stem cell lineage for in vitro and in vivo use, to assess the effects of growth factor exposure in vitro on cell morphology, behavior, and tendon-associated glycoprotein production, and to assess the therapeutic potential of intralesional stem cells, as a function of dose, in vivo. First, rat adipose-derived (rAdMSC) and bone marrow-derived (rBMSC) stem cell lineages were isolated, characterized with flow cytometric analysis, and compared in terms of proliferation (MTS assay) and cellular viability (calcein AM staining). Rat AdMSCs displayed superior proliferation and more homogenous CD 73, CD 44H, and CD 90 expression as compared to rBMSC. Next, the tenogenic differentiation potential of the rAdMSC lineage was tested in vitro through isolated and combined stimulation with reported tenogenic growth factors, transforming growth factor (TGF)-β3 and connective tissue growth factor (CTGF). We found that the most effective tenogenic factor in terms of cellular morphologic change, cell alignment/orientation, sustained cellular viability, and tendon-associated glycoprotein upregulation was TGFβ3, and we confirmed that rAdMSC could be induced toward a tenogenic lineage in vitro. Finally, the therapeutic potential of rAdMSCs as a function of dose was assessed using a rat acute Achilles tendon injury model. Amounts of 5 × 10(5) (low dose) and 4 × 10(6) (high dose) were used. Subjectively, on the gross morphology, the rAdMSC-treated tendons exhibited fewer adhesions and less scar tissue than the control tendons; however, regardless of the rAdMSC dose, no significant differences in histological grade or tissue collagen I deposition were noted between the rAdMSC-treated and control tendons. Collectively, rAdMSCs exhibited appropriate stem cell markers and tenogenic potential in vitro, but the clinical efficacy of intralesional implantation of undifferentiated cells in acute tendonitis cases could not be proven. Further investigation into complementary therapeutics or specialized culture conditions prior to implantation are warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9404841
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94048412022-08-26 Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response Bowers, Kristin Amelse, Lisa Bow, Austin Newby, Steven MacDonald, Amber Sun, Xiaocun Anderson, David Dhar, Madhu Bioengineering (Basel) Article Stem cell therapy for the treatment of tendon injury is an emerging clinical practice in the fields of human and veterinary sports medicine; however, the therapeutic benefit of intralesional transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells in tendonitis cases is not well designed. Questions persist regarding the overall tenogenic potential and efficacy of this treatment alone. In this study, we aimed to isolate a rat mesenchymal stem cell lineage for in vitro and in vivo use, to assess the effects of growth factor exposure in vitro on cell morphology, behavior, and tendon-associated glycoprotein production, and to assess the therapeutic potential of intralesional stem cells, as a function of dose, in vivo. First, rat adipose-derived (rAdMSC) and bone marrow-derived (rBMSC) stem cell lineages were isolated, characterized with flow cytometric analysis, and compared in terms of proliferation (MTS assay) and cellular viability (calcein AM staining). Rat AdMSCs displayed superior proliferation and more homogenous CD 73, CD 44H, and CD 90 expression as compared to rBMSC. Next, the tenogenic differentiation potential of the rAdMSC lineage was tested in vitro through isolated and combined stimulation with reported tenogenic growth factors, transforming growth factor (TGF)-β3 and connective tissue growth factor (CTGF). We found that the most effective tenogenic factor in terms of cellular morphologic change, cell alignment/orientation, sustained cellular viability, and tendon-associated glycoprotein upregulation was TGFβ3, and we confirmed that rAdMSC could be induced toward a tenogenic lineage in vitro. Finally, the therapeutic potential of rAdMSCs as a function of dose was assessed using a rat acute Achilles tendon injury model. Amounts of 5 × 10(5) (low dose) and 4 × 10(6) (high dose) were used. Subjectively, on the gross morphology, the rAdMSC-treated tendons exhibited fewer adhesions and less scar tissue than the control tendons; however, regardless of the rAdMSC dose, no significant differences in histological grade or tissue collagen I deposition were noted between the rAdMSC-treated and control tendons. Collectively, rAdMSCs exhibited appropriate stem cell markers and tenogenic potential in vitro, but the clinical efficacy of intralesional implantation of undifferentiated cells in acute tendonitis cases could not be proven. Further investigation into complementary therapeutics or specialized culture conditions prior to implantation are warranted. MDPI 2022-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9404841/ /pubmed/36004932 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9080407 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Bowers, Kristin
Amelse, Lisa
Bow, Austin
Newby, Steven
MacDonald, Amber
Sun, Xiaocun
Anderson, David
Dhar, Madhu
Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title_full Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title_fullStr Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title_full_unstemmed Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title_short Mesenchymal Stem Cell Use in Acute Tendon Injury: In Vitro Tenogenic Potential vs. In Vivo Dose Response
title_sort mesenchymal stem cell use in acute tendon injury: in vitro tenogenic potential vs. in vivo dose response
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9404841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36004932
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9080407
work_keys_str_mv AT bowerskristin mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT amelselisa mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT bowaustin mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT newbysteven mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT macdonaldamber mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT sunxiaocun mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT andersondavid mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse
AT dharmadhu mesenchymalstemcelluseinacutetendoninjuryinvitrotenogenicpotentialvsinvivodoseresponse