Limits...
The canine epiphyseal-derived mesenchymal stem cells are comparable to bone marrow derived-mesenchymal stem cells.

Chang YP, Hong HP, Lee YH, Liu IH - J. Vet. Med. Sci. (2014)

Bottom Line: The successful rate for EMSC isolation is significantly higher compared to BMSC isolation, while the other properties of the isolated MSCs including the clonogenicity, proliferative potentials and molecular phenotypes were not discernibly different between the MSCs established by the two methods.In conclusion, we demonstrated a new procedure to harvest MSCs by bone biopsy at the epiphyseal region.This method is less time consuming and more reliable, and the resulting MSCs are comparable to those harvested by bone marrow aspiration.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Veterinary Clinical Science, School of Veterinary Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.

ABSTRACT
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold great potential in cell therapy and have attracted increasing interests in a wide range of biomedical sciences. However, the scarcity of MSCs and the prolonged isolation procedure limited the clinical application. To address these 2 issues, we developed a method to isolate MSCs from bone biopsy tissues of euthanized canine body donors. Compared to the traditional method to isolate MSCs from aspirated bone marrow (BMSCs), the isolation procedure for MSCs from harvested epiphyseal cancellous bone (EMSCs) was less time-consuming. The isolated EMSCs had similar plastic-adherence, tri-lineage differentiation and consistent surface marker profiles compared to BMSCs. We harvested BMSCs and EMSCs from 24 euthanized cases from clinics and 42 euthanized donors from a local shelter. The successful rate for EMSC isolation is significantly higher compared to BMSC isolation, while the other properties of the isolated MSCs including the clonogenicity, proliferative potentials and molecular phenotypes were not discernibly different between the MSCs established by the two methods. In conclusion, we demonstrated a new procedure to harvest MSCs by bone biopsy at the epiphyseal region. This method is less time consuming and more reliable, and the resulting MSCs are comparable to those harvested by bone marrow aspiration. The combination of the two methods can greatly improve the efficiency to harvest MSCs.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparisons between EMSCs and BMSCs. (A, B) The MSCs established by bone biopsy andbone marrow aspiration had similar CFE (A) and PDT (B). (C) RT-PCR indicated that bothBMSCs (B) and EMSCs (E) from donor #1, #2, #11, #15 and #16 at TCAPO express CD73 andCD105, which are typical MSCs positive markers. Moreover, all MSCs express MHC-1, butnot MHC-2. There was no discernible difference between the MSC populations establishedby these two methods. β-actin was used as the loading control. A blood sample fromdonor #27 (Blood) at TCAPO was used as a positive control, while no template reactions(H2O) were done as a negative control to all reactions markers.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383772&req=5

fig_004: Comparisons between EMSCs and BMSCs. (A, B) The MSCs established by bone biopsy andbone marrow aspiration had similar CFE (A) and PDT (B). (C) RT-PCR indicated that bothBMSCs (B) and EMSCs (E) from donor #1, #2, #11, #15 and #16 at TCAPO express CD73 andCD105, which are typical MSCs positive markers. Moreover, all MSCs express MHC-1, butnot MHC-2. There was no discernible difference between the MSC populations establishedby these two methods. β-actin was used as the loading control. A blood sample fromdonor #27 (Blood) at TCAPO was used as a positive control, while no template reactions(H2O) were done as a negative control to all reactions markers.

Mentions: Our previous report on mice suggested that the MSCs established by the two methodsrepresent cells with different properties and that EMSCs have greater density ofclonogenicity with higher proliferative potential [3].Due to the anatomical proximity, it is of interest to clarify whether the populations of thecanine MSCs harvested by bone marrow aspiration and bone biopsy are distinct. Surprisingly,we did not find a significant difference in the colony forming efficiency (CFE) between theMSCs harvested by the two methods (Fig. 4AFig. 4.


The canine epiphyseal-derived mesenchymal stem cells are comparable to bone marrow derived-mesenchymal stem cells.

Chang YP, Hong HP, Lee YH, Liu IH - J. Vet. Med. Sci. (2014)

Comparisons between EMSCs and BMSCs. (A, B) The MSCs established by bone biopsy andbone marrow aspiration had similar CFE (A) and PDT (B). (C) RT-PCR indicated that bothBMSCs (B) and EMSCs (E) from donor #1, #2, #11, #15 and #16 at TCAPO express CD73 andCD105, which are typical MSCs positive markers. Moreover, all MSCs express MHC-1, butnot MHC-2. There was no discernible difference between the MSC populations establishedby these two methods. β-actin was used as the loading control. A blood sample fromdonor #27 (Blood) at TCAPO was used as a positive control, while no template reactions(H2O) were done as a negative control to all reactions markers.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383772&req=5

fig_004: Comparisons between EMSCs and BMSCs. (A, B) The MSCs established by bone biopsy andbone marrow aspiration had similar CFE (A) and PDT (B). (C) RT-PCR indicated that bothBMSCs (B) and EMSCs (E) from donor #1, #2, #11, #15 and #16 at TCAPO express CD73 andCD105, which are typical MSCs positive markers. Moreover, all MSCs express MHC-1, butnot MHC-2. There was no discernible difference between the MSC populations establishedby these two methods. β-actin was used as the loading control. A blood sample fromdonor #27 (Blood) at TCAPO was used as a positive control, while no template reactions(H2O) were done as a negative control to all reactions markers.
Mentions: Our previous report on mice suggested that the MSCs established by the two methodsrepresent cells with different properties and that EMSCs have greater density ofclonogenicity with higher proliferative potential [3].Due to the anatomical proximity, it is of interest to clarify whether the populations of thecanine MSCs harvested by bone marrow aspiration and bone biopsy are distinct. Surprisingly,we did not find a significant difference in the colony forming efficiency (CFE) between theMSCs harvested by the two methods (Fig. 4AFig. 4.

Bottom Line: The successful rate for EMSC isolation is significantly higher compared to BMSC isolation, while the other properties of the isolated MSCs including the clonogenicity, proliferative potentials and molecular phenotypes were not discernibly different between the MSCs established by the two methods.In conclusion, we demonstrated a new procedure to harvest MSCs by bone biopsy at the epiphyseal region.This method is less time consuming and more reliable, and the resulting MSCs are comparable to those harvested by bone marrow aspiration.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Veterinary Clinical Science, School of Veterinary Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.

ABSTRACT
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold great potential in cell therapy and have attracted increasing interests in a wide range of biomedical sciences. However, the scarcity of MSCs and the prolonged isolation procedure limited the clinical application. To address these 2 issues, we developed a method to isolate MSCs from bone biopsy tissues of euthanized canine body donors. Compared to the traditional method to isolate MSCs from aspirated bone marrow (BMSCs), the isolation procedure for MSCs from harvested epiphyseal cancellous bone (EMSCs) was less time-consuming. The isolated EMSCs had similar plastic-adherence, tri-lineage differentiation and consistent surface marker profiles compared to BMSCs. We harvested BMSCs and EMSCs from 24 euthanized cases from clinics and 42 euthanized donors from a local shelter. The successful rate for EMSC isolation is significantly higher compared to BMSC isolation, while the other properties of the isolated MSCs including the clonogenicity, proliferative potentials and molecular phenotypes were not discernibly different between the MSCs established by the two methods. In conclusion, we demonstrated a new procedure to harvest MSCs by bone biopsy at the epiphyseal region. This method is less time consuming and more reliable, and the resulting MSCs are comparable to those harvested by bone marrow aspiration. The combination of the two methods can greatly improve the efficiency to harvest MSCs.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus