Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts
Processed nerve allografts are increasingly used as “off the shelf” nerve replacements for surgically bridging nerve gaps. Benchmarking the regenerative capacity of a commercially available human‐derived nerve or xenograft in a rat nerve injury model would provide a convenient platform for future st...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A 2014-04, Vol.102 (4), p.1085-1091 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1091 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 1085 |
| container_title | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A |
| container_volume | 102 |
| creator | Wood, Matthew D. Kemp, Stephen W. P. Liu, Edward H. Szynkaruk, Mark Gordon, Tessa Borschel, Gregory H. |
| description | Processed nerve allografts are increasingly used as “off the shelf” nerve replacements for surgically bridging nerve gaps. Benchmarking the regenerative capacity of a commercially available human‐derived nerve or xenograft in a rat nerve injury model would provide a convenient platform for future studies seeking to modify the processed nerve graft. Human and rat processed nerve grafts were used to bridge a 14 mm defect in a Sprague‐Dawley rat sciatic nerve. Reversed autografts served as a positive control group. Twelve weeks following surgery, the distal nerve stumps were retrograde labeled and harvested for histology and histomorphometry. The cross‐sectional areas of the human‐ and rat‐derived processed nerve grafts were similar. Neuron counts and myelinated axon counts following use of the human‐derived processed xenografts were decreased compared with those obtained from both the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts and the autografts; the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts were statistically equivalent to autografts. Measures of nerve fiber diameter and myelination revealed inferior axon regeneration maturity in both processed nerve grafts compared with autografts. Processed xenografts showed significantly reduced regeneration compared with autografts or processed allografts indicating that cross‐species immunological reactions are important considerations in this rat model. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 1085–1091, 2014. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jbm.a.34773 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1677941671</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1677941671</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5313-7977647306d15805805b44382c6a845f5926b5499ee8f78ef65bf8754d84813f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkdtrFTEQxkNR2lr75LssiCDIHnO_PNaip0qtWFoKfQnZ3Um7x70ck9166l9v1nPaguAFQjITfvPNDB9CzwieEYzpm0XRztyMcaXYFtolQtCcGykeTTE3OaNG7qAnMS4SLLGg22iHMskwVmQX_Th1Q15BqG-gypahLyHGFHUQbiBzTdNfBeeHmMVxuezDkLV9SP-rvssCXEHC3FCnpE65G7Lh2nXZ9di67o-aK-g2mk_RY--aCPubdw-dv393dniUH3-efzg8OM5LwQjLlVFKcsWwrIjQeDoF50zTUjrNhReGyiItagC0Vxq8FIXXSvBKc02YZ3vo1Vo3jfJthDjYto4lNI3roB-jJVIpw9NN_gOVnBiiBf03KjDnyQuKE_riN3TRj6FLO0-CmBjOjErU6zVVhj7GAN4uQ926cGsJtpPRNhltnf1ldKKfbzTHooXqnr1zNgEvN4CLpWt8cF1ZxwdOM0qFnPaga-573cDt33raj28_Hdx1z9dFdRxgdV_kwlcrFVPCXpzM7dGl4PLky4Wds58mc86K</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1660194397</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Wood, Matthew D. ; Kemp, Stephen W. P. ; Liu, Edward H. ; Szynkaruk, Mark ; Gordon, Tessa ; Borschel, Gregory H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wood, Matthew D. ; Kemp, Stephen W. P. ; Liu, Edward H. ; Szynkaruk, Mark ; Gordon, Tessa ; Borschel, Gregory H.</creatorcontrib><description>Processed nerve allografts are increasingly used as “off the shelf” nerve replacements for surgically bridging nerve gaps. Benchmarking the regenerative capacity of a commercially available human‐derived nerve or xenograft in a rat nerve injury model would provide a convenient platform for future studies seeking to modify the processed nerve graft. Human and rat processed nerve grafts were used to bridge a 14 mm defect in a Sprague‐Dawley rat sciatic nerve. Reversed autografts served as a positive control group. Twelve weeks following surgery, the distal nerve stumps were retrograde labeled and harvested for histology and histomorphometry. The cross‐sectional areas of the human‐ and rat‐derived processed nerve grafts were similar. Neuron counts and myelinated axon counts following use of the human‐derived processed xenografts were decreased compared with those obtained from both the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts and the autografts; the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts were statistically equivalent to autografts. Measures of nerve fiber diameter and myelination revealed inferior axon regeneration maturity in both processed nerve grafts compared with autografts. Processed xenografts showed significantly reduced regeneration compared with autografts or processed allografts indicating that cross‐species immunological reactions are important considerations in this rat model. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 1085–1091, 2014.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1549-3296</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-4965</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.34773</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23630071</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Allografts - transplantation ; Animals ; Axons ; Axons - pathology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bridges (structures) ; Bridging ; Counting ; decellularized tissue ; Female ; Grafting ; Heterografts - transplantation ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Nerve Fibers - pathology ; nerve graft ; nerve injury ; Nerve Regeneration ; Nerve Tissue - transplantation ; Nerves ; Neurons - metabolism ; Neurosurgery ; peripheral nerve ; Rats ; Rats, Sprague-Dawley ; Regeneration ; Regenerative ; Sciatic Nerve - pathology ; Sciatic Nerve - physiopathology ; Staining and Labeling ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgical implants ; Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments</subject><ispartof>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A, 2014-04, Vol.102 (4), p.1085-1091</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5313-7977647306d15805805b44382c6a845f5926b5499ee8f78ef65bf8754d84813f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5313-7977647306d15805805b44382c6a845f5926b5499ee8f78ef65bf8754d84813f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjbm.a.34773$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjbm.a.34773$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28322562$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23630071$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wood, Matthew D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemp, Stephen W. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Edward H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szynkaruk, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, Tessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borschel, Gregory H.</creatorcontrib><title>Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts</title><title>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A</title><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><description>Processed nerve allografts are increasingly used as “off the shelf” nerve replacements for surgically bridging nerve gaps. Benchmarking the regenerative capacity of a commercially available human‐derived nerve or xenograft in a rat nerve injury model would provide a convenient platform for future studies seeking to modify the processed nerve graft. Human and rat processed nerve grafts were used to bridge a 14 mm defect in a Sprague‐Dawley rat sciatic nerve. Reversed autografts served as a positive control group. Twelve weeks following surgery, the distal nerve stumps were retrograde labeled and harvested for histology and histomorphometry. The cross‐sectional areas of the human‐ and rat‐derived processed nerve grafts were similar. Neuron counts and myelinated axon counts following use of the human‐derived processed xenografts were decreased compared with those obtained from both the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts and the autografts; the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts were statistically equivalent to autografts. Measures of nerve fiber diameter and myelination revealed inferior axon regeneration maturity in both processed nerve grafts compared with autografts. Processed xenografts showed significantly reduced regeneration compared with autografts or processed allografts indicating that cross‐species immunological reactions are important considerations in this rat model. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 1085–1091, 2014.</description><subject>Allografts - transplantation</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Axons</subject><subject>Axons - pathology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bridges (structures)</subject><subject>Bridging</subject><subject>Counting</subject><subject>decellularized tissue</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Grafting</subject><subject>Heterografts - transplantation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Nerve Fibers - pathology</subject><subject>nerve graft</subject><subject>nerve injury</subject><subject>Nerve Regeneration</subject><subject>Nerve Tissue - transplantation</subject><subject>Nerves</subject><subject>Neurons - metabolism</subject><subject>Neurosurgery</subject><subject>peripheral nerve</subject><subject>Rats</subject><subject>Rats, Sprague-Dawley</subject><subject>Regeneration</subject><subject>Regenerative</subject><subject>Sciatic Nerve - pathology</subject><subject>Sciatic Nerve - physiopathology</subject><subject>Staining and Labeling</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments</subject><issn>1549-3296</issn><issn>1552-4965</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkdtrFTEQxkNR2lr75LssiCDIHnO_PNaip0qtWFoKfQnZ3Um7x70ck9166l9v1nPaguAFQjITfvPNDB9CzwieEYzpm0XRztyMcaXYFtolQtCcGykeTTE3OaNG7qAnMS4SLLGg22iHMskwVmQX_Th1Q15BqG-gypahLyHGFHUQbiBzTdNfBeeHmMVxuezDkLV9SP-rvssCXEHC3FCnpE65G7Lh2nXZ9di67o-aK-g2mk_RY--aCPubdw-dv393dniUH3-efzg8OM5LwQjLlVFKcsWwrIjQeDoF50zTUjrNhReGyiItagC0Vxq8FIXXSvBKc02YZ3vo1Vo3jfJthDjYto4lNI3roB-jJVIpw9NN_gOVnBiiBf03KjDnyQuKE_riN3TRj6FLO0-CmBjOjErU6zVVhj7GAN4uQ926cGsJtpPRNhltnf1ldKKfbzTHooXqnr1zNgEvN4CLpWt8cF1ZxwdOM0qFnPaga-573cDt33raj28_Hdx1z9dFdRxgdV_kwlcrFVPCXpzM7dGl4PLky4Wds58mc86K</recordid><startdate>201404</startdate><enddate>201404</enddate><creator>Wood, Matthew D.</creator><creator>Kemp, Stephen W. P.</creator><creator>Liu, Edward H.</creator><creator>Szynkaruk, Mark</creator><creator>Gordon, Tessa</creator><creator>Borschel, Gregory H.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201404</creationdate><title>Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts</title><author>Wood, Matthew D. ; Kemp, Stephen W. P. ; Liu, Edward H. ; Szynkaruk, Mark ; Gordon, Tessa ; Borschel, Gregory H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5313-7977647306d15805805b44382c6a845f5926b5499ee8f78ef65bf8754d84813f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Allografts - transplantation</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Axons</topic><topic>Axons - pathology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bridges (structures)</topic><topic>Bridging</topic><topic>Counting</topic><topic>decellularized tissue</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Grafting</topic><topic>Heterografts - transplantation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Nerve Fibers - pathology</topic><topic>nerve graft</topic><topic>nerve injury</topic><topic>Nerve Regeneration</topic><topic>Nerve Tissue - transplantation</topic><topic>Nerves</topic><topic>Neurons - metabolism</topic><topic>Neurosurgery</topic><topic>peripheral nerve</topic><topic>Rats</topic><topic>Rats, Sprague-Dawley</topic><topic>Regeneration</topic><topic>Regenerative</topic><topic>Sciatic Nerve - pathology</topic><topic>Sciatic Nerve - physiopathology</topic><topic>Staining and Labeling</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wood, Matthew D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemp, Stephen W. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Edward H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szynkaruk, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, Tessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borschel, Gregory H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wood, Matthew D.</au><au>Kemp, Stephen W. P.</au><au>Liu, Edward H.</au><au>Szynkaruk, Mark</au><au>Gordon, Tessa</au><au>Borschel, Gregory H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts</atitle><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A</jtitle><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><date>2014-04</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>102</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1085</spage><epage>1091</epage><pages>1085-1091</pages><issn>1549-3296</issn><eissn>1552-4965</eissn><abstract>Processed nerve allografts are increasingly used as “off the shelf” nerve replacements for surgically bridging nerve gaps. Benchmarking the regenerative capacity of a commercially available human‐derived nerve or xenograft in a rat nerve injury model would provide a convenient platform for future studies seeking to modify the processed nerve graft. Human and rat processed nerve grafts were used to bridge a 14 mm defect in a Sprague‐Dawley rat sciatic nerve. Reversed autografts served as a positive control group. Twelve weeks following surgery, the distal nerve stumps were retrograde labeled and harvested for histology and histomorphometry. The cross‐sectional areas of the human‐ and rat‐derived processed nerve grafts were similar. Neuron counts and myelinated axon counts following use of the human‐derived processed xenografts were decreased compared with those obtained from both the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts and the autografts; the rat‐derived processed nerve allografts were statistically equivalent to autografts. Measures of nerve fiber diameter and myelination revealed inferior axon regeneration maturity in both processed nerve grafts compared with autografts. Processed xenografts showed significantly reduced regeneration compared with autografts or processed allografts indicating that cross‐species immunological reactions are important considerations in this rat model. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 1085–1091, 2014.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, NJ</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>23630071</pmid><doi>10.1002/jbm.a.34773</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1549-3296 |
| ispartof | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A, 2014-04, Vol.102 (4), p.1085-1091 |
| issn | 1549-3296 1552-4965 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1677941671 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Allografts - transplantation Animals Axons Axons - pathology Biological and medical sciences Bridges (structures) Bridging Counting decellularized tissue Female Grafting Heterografts - transplantation Humans Medical sciences Nerve Fibers - pathology nerve graft nerve injury Nerve Regeneration Nerve Tissue - transplantation Nerves Neurons - metabolism Neurosurgery peripheral nerve Rats Rats, Sprague-Dawley Regeneration Regenerative Sciatic Nerve - pathology Sciatic Nerve - physiopathology Staining and Labeling Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgical implants Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments |
| title | Rat-derived processed nerve allografts support more axon regeneration in rat than human-derived processed nerve xenografts |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T06%3A46%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rat-derived%20processed%20nerve%20allografts%20support%20more%20axon%20regeneration%20in%20rat%20than%20human-derived%20processed%20nerve%20xenografts&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20biomedical%20materials%20research.%20Part%20A&rft.au=Wood,%20Matthew%20D.&rft.date=2014-04&rft.volume=102&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1085&rft.epage=1091&rft.pages=1085-1091&rft.issn=1549-3296&rft.eissn=1552-4965&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jbm.a.34773&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1677941671%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1660194397&rft_id=info:pmid/23630071&rfr_iscdi=true |