journal article·2020-06-17Open access

Extracellular Vesicles Enhance the Remodeling of Cell-Free Silk Vascular Scaffolds in Rat Aortae

Eoghan M. Cunnane, Katherine L. Lorentz, Aneesh K. Ramaswamy, Prerak Gupta, Biman B. Mandal, Fergal J. O’Brien, Justin S. Weinbaum, David A. Vorp

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 12· Issue 24

Abstract

Vascular tissue engineering is aimed at developing regenerative vascular grafts to restore tissue function by bypassing or replacing defective arterial segments with tubular biodegradable scaffolds. Scaffolds are often combined with stem or progenitor cells to prevent acute thrombosis and initiate scaffold remodeling. However, there are limitations to cell-based technologies regarding safety and clinical translation. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanosized particles released by most cell types, including stem and progenitor cells, that serve to transmit protein and RNA cargo to target cells throughout the body. EVs have been shown to replicate the therapeutic effect of their parent cells; therefore, EVs derived from stem or progenitor cells may serve as a more translatable, cell-free, therapeutic base for vascular scaffolds. Our study aims to determine if EV incorporation provides a positive effect on graft patency and remodeling in vivo. We first assessed the effect of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell (hADMSC) EVs on vascular cells using in vitro bioassays. We then developed an EV-functionalized vascular graft by vacuum-seeding EVs into porous silk-based tubular scaffolds. These constructs were implanted as aortic interposition grafts in Lewis rats, and their remodeling capacity was compared to that observed for hADMSC-seeded and blank (non-seeded) controls. The EV group demonstrated improved patency (100%) compared to the hADMSC (56%) and blank controls (82%) following eight weeks in vivo. The EV group also produced significantly more elastin (126.46%) and collagen (44.59%) compared to the blank group, while the hADMSC group failed to produce significantly more elastin (57.64%) or collagen (11.21%) compared to the blank group. Qualitative staining of the explanted neo-tissue revealed improved endothelium formation, increased smooth muscle cell infiltration, and reduced macrophage numbers in the EV group compared to the controls, which aids in explaining this group’s favorable pre-clinical outcomes.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Extracellular vesicles in disease · MicroRNA in disease regulation · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States

Tissue Engineering Research Group, Department of Anatomy and Regenerative Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland D02 YN77

Department of Biosciences and Bioengineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, India 781039

Centre for Nanotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, India 781039

Trinity Centre for Bioengineering, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland D02 R590

Advanced Materials and Bioengineering Research Centre (AMBER), RCSI and TCD, Dublin, Ireland D02 R590

McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219, United States

Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States

Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States

Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States

Funding

University of Pittsburgh · National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute · Department of Biotechnology , Ministry of Science and Technology · H2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions · Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology · RoosterBio, Inc.

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1161/CIR.000000000000048510.1161/CIR.0000000000000485 ↗
2. Mendis S. · 2011
3. 10.1056/NEJMra140694410.1056/NEJMra1406944 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.01.03510.1016/j.jvs.2009.01.035 ↗
5. 10.1161/01.RES.0000196867.12470.8410.1161/01.RES.0000196867.12470.84 ↗
6. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.01554910.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015549 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.05010.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.050 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.ejvs.2003.12.02710.1016/j.ejvs.2003.12.027 ↗
9. 10.3389/fcvm.2018.0008610.3389/fcvm.2018.00086 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.05.12010.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.05.120 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.09.03410.1016/j.jvs.2016.09.034 ↗
12. 10.1089/ten.tea.2015.037910.1089/ten.tea.2015.0379 ↗
13. 10.1089/ten.tea.2009.042710.1089/ten.tea.2009.0427 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.10.04410.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.10.044 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.07.03410.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.07.034 ↗
16. 10.1002/stem.257510.1002/stem.2575 ↗
17. 10.1038/nri256710.1038/nri2567 ↗
18. 10.1007/s10557-015-6630-510.1007/s10557-015-6630-5 ↗
19. 10.1371/journal.pone.006845110.1371/journal.pone.0068451 ↗
20. 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.111.25328610.1161/CIRCRESAHA.111.253286 ↗
21. 10.1159/00043859410.1159/000438594 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.12.04310.1016/j.ijcard.2014.12.043 ↗
23. 10.1371/journal.pone.008868510.1371/journal.pone.0088685 ↗
24. 10.1038/srep4562210.1038/srep45622 ↗
25. 10.1089/ten.tea.2017.004510.1089/ten.tea.2017.0045 ↗
26. 10.1038/s41598-017-12919-x10.1038/s41598-017-12919-x ↗
27. 10.1038/srep3299310.1038/srep32993 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.01.04910.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.01.049 ↗
29. 10.1002/mabi.20170024210.1002/mabi.201700242 ↗
30. 10.1007/s10439-015-1545-710.1007/s10439-015-1545-7 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.mbplus.2019.10001410.1016/j.mbplus.2019.100014 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.04.04210.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.04.042 ↗
33. 10.1039/C5OB01451D10.1039/C5OB01451D ↗
34. 10.1021/acsami.6b0078310.1021/acsami.6b00783 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.01.02010.1016/j.actbio.2020.01.020 ↗
36. 10.1002/jbm.a.3299710.1002/jbm.a.32997 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.00110.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.001 ↗
38. 10.1089/ten.tea.2009.070810.1089/ten.tea.2009.0708 ↗
39. Imig J. D. · 2013 · 3 · 95710.1002/cphy.c120028 ↗
40. 10.1089/ten.tea.2014.020810.1089/ten.tea.2014.0208 ↗
41. 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b0012310.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00123 ↗
42. 10.1155/2018/854534710.1155/2018/8545347 ↗
43. 10.1073/pnas.170921011410.1073/pnas.1709210114 ↗
44. 10.3402/jev.v3.2691310.3402/jev.v3.26913 ↗
45. 10.3402/jev.v2i0.1986110.3402/jev.v2i0.19861 ↗
46. 10.1371/journal.pone.017430310.1371/journal.pone.0174303 ↗
47. 10.1038/srep3612010.1038/srep36120 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.gene.2014.08.04110.1016/j.gene.2014.08.041 ↗