Skip navigation

DSpace JSPUI

DSpace preserves and enables easy and open access to all types of digital content including text, images, moving images, mpegs and data sets

Learn More
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Publication Year
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
  • Search TDR
  • Rights Q&A
    • My Page
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 生物資源暨農學院
  3. 生物科技研究所
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21987
Full metadata record
???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield???ValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor吳信志(Shinn-Chih Wu)
dc.contributor.authorMing-Kai Hsiehen
dc.contributor.author謝明凱zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-08T03:56:34Z-
dc.date.copyright2020-12-25
dc.date.issued2020
dc.date.submitted2020-12-08
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21987-
dc.description.abstract細胞,支架,骨誘導因子及血流供應是骨再生醫學重要的組成,但我們始終對最後再生產物中,植入細胞與宿主細胞的比例及相互關係並不清楚。根據以往研究我們曾用同種異體骨髓幹細胞轉染質體植入小鼠頭蓋骨缺損,且成功誘導分化,但因再生產物植入細胞與宿主細胞無法分辨,因此仍無法解答兩種細胞在再生產物的腳色。因此,我們設計使用異體綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞當作細胞來源,植入紅螢光豬頭蓋骨缺損,來藉此觀察在骨缺損情況下,再生產物中兩種螢光細胞比例及分布情況。
本論文的首要部分,我們先在體外支架上植入不同密度之異體綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞,以電子顯微鏡與磷酸酶及茜素紅等染色發現高密度細胞組較地密度組有更強螢光表現與更多骨分化。緊接著探討是否骨分化會影響螢光表現,結果呈現自綠螢光豬分離出之骨髓間葉幹細胞在骨誘導28天內仍保留其螢光特性且螢光亦不影響骨生成。
在本論文的最後體內實驗部分,我們設計五組試驗模式(第一組:骨缺損未植入任何材料;第二組: 骨缺損僅植入支架; 第三組: 植入加骨誘導液之支架; 第四組: 植入含5 x 103個綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞之支架; 第五組: 植入含5 x 103個綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞之支架)在每一隻本土紅螢光豬頭蓋骨上鑿出七個骨缺損(第一組至第三組各一骨缺損; 第四組及第五組各兩個骨缺損)。本計畫共使用八頭本土紅螢光豬,每周犧牲兩頭,螢光顯微鏡顯示綠螢光於整個骨再生過程中皆存在且高密度組在第四周有更多螢光表現,紅螢光宿主細胞需支架上有更多空間才能招募進來且無植入細胞無法招募宿主細胞,組織切片及免疫螢光染色皆顯示更多植入細胞會有更好骨分化現象。
利用綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞移植入異體紅螢光豬,較大鼠實驗不僅可以排除個體差異及免疫反應,更能為組織工程中移植細胞占比及植入體中分布情況與宿主細胞交互作用得到完整解答,同時將此觀念應用至後續骨髓間葉幹細胞招募機轉。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractCells, scaffolds, and factors are the triad of regenerative engineering; however, it is difficult to distinguish whether cells in the regenerative construct are from the seeded cells or host cells via the host blood supply. We performed a novel in vivo study to transplant enhanced green fluorescent pig mesenchymal stem cells (EGFP-pMSCs) into calvarial defect of DsRed pigs. The cell distribution and proportion were distinguished by the different fluorescent colors through the whole regenerative period. The first part of present project, we transplant EGFP-pMSCs into gelatin scaffolds and found that the increasing fluorescence expression and osteogenic profiles as increased loaded number of cells indicate biocompatibility and biodegradability of scaffold after differentiation. In order to clarify if the expression of green fluorescence alter the magnitude of osteogenic differentiation, we compared transgenic pig-derived eGFP MSCs and nonviral eGFP-transfected MSCs and found that the fluorescence expression wound not interfere with osteogenic differentiation after osteoinduction for 28 days.
In our in vivo study of this project, eight adult domestic Ds-Red pigs were treated with five modalities: empty defects without scaffold (group 1); defects filled only with scaffold (group 2); defects filled with osteoinduction medium-loaded scaffold (group 3); defects filled with 5 x 103 cells/scaffold (group 4); and defects filled with 5 x 104 cells/scaffold (group 5). The in vitro cell distribution, morphology, osteogenic differentiation, and fluorescence images of groups 4 and 5 were analyzed. Two animals were sacrificed at 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks after transplantation. The in vivo fluorescence imaging and quantification data showed that EGFP-pMSCs were represented in the scaffolds in groups 4 and 5 throughout the whole regenerative period. A higher seeded cell density resulted in more sustained seeded cells in bone regeneration compared to a lower seeded cell density. Host cells were recruited by seeded cells if enough space was available in the scaffold. Host cells in groups 1 to 3 did not change from the 1st week to 4th week, which indicates that the scaffold without seeded cells cannot recruit host cells even when enough space is available for cell ingrowth. The histological and immunohistochemical data showed that more cells were involved in osteogenesis in scaffolds with seeded cells. Our in vivo results showed that more seeded cells recruit more host cells and that both cell types participate in osteogenesis. These results suggest that scaffolds without seeded cells may not be effective in bone transplantation.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:56:34Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
U0001-0412202016440400.pdf: 3002968 bytes, checksum: 29e4e58b954710e870416056a97c7861 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2020
en
dc.description.tableofcontentsCONTENTS
論文口試委員審定書 i
致謝 ii
中文摘要 iii
Abstract iv
CONTENTS vi
LIST OF FIGURES ix
Chapter 1 Literature review 1
1.1 Bone defect repair 1
1.2 Allogenic transplantation of GFP pMSCs 2
1.3 Critical size calvarial defect model in Ds-Red pig 7
1.4 Gelatin sponge as the scaffold 8
1.5 Significance 11
Chapter 2 Distribution and osteogenic differentiation of GFP pMSCs in the scaffold 12
2.1 Abstract 12
2.2 Objective 12
2.3 Materials and methods 13
2.3.1 Isolation and Culture of Bone Marrow-Derived EGFP-MSC 13
2.3.2 Fluorescence-Activated Cell-Sorting Analysis 14
2.3.3 In vitro osteogenic differentiation of EGFP-pMSCs 14
2.4 EGFP-pMSCs culture in the scaffold 15
2.4.1 Materials 15
2.4.2 Cell culture 16
2.4.3 Seeding of cells 17
2.4.4 In vitro osteogenic differentiation 18
2.4.5 Cell distribution and morphology 18
2.5 In vitro osteogenic profile 20
2.5.1 Alkaline phosphatase activity 20
2.5.2 Alizarin red S (ARS) staining and quantification 22
2.6 Statistical analysis 23
2.7 Discussion 23
Chapter 3 Expression of fluorescence after osteogenesis of MSCs from eGFP transgenic pigs 25
3.1 Abstract 25
3.2 Materials and methods 26
3.2.1 Cell Culture of MSCs from Transgenic Pigs 26
3.2.2 Isolation and Culture of Pig Mesenchymal Stem Cells 27
3.2.3 Quantitative Assessment of Cell Viability After Transfection 27
3.2.4 In Vitro Transfection Efficiency of pMSCs 28
3.2.5 Fluorescence Evaluated by Imaging and FACS after Osteoinduction in Monolayers 29
3.2.7 Cell Distribution and Morphology Analysis after Osteogenic Differentiation 30
3.2.8 Quantification of Fluorescence in 3-D Scaffolds 31
3.2.9 Osteogenic Profiles in 3-D Scaffolds 31
3.2.10 Immunohistochemistry (IHC) of Osteogenic-Related Markers 33
3.3 Statistical Analysis 34
3.4 Result 34
3.4.1 Optimization of Cell Viability and Transfection Efficiency in Group 2 34
3.4.2 Monolayer Culture 36
3.4.2.1 Fluorescent Imaging and Quantification after Osteoinduction 36
3.4.2.2 Fluorescence Evaluation by FACS after Osteoinduction in Monolayers 38
3.4.2.3 Coexistence of Green Fluorescence Proteins and Bone-Like Nodules 38
3.4.3 In Vitro 3-D Culture 39
3.4.3.1 Cell Distribution and Morphology Analysis 39
3.4.3.2 Fluorescence Imaging and Quantification after Osteogenic Differentiation 39
3.4.3.3 Staining and Activity of Osteogenic Profiles 41
3.4.3.4 Immunohistochemistry of Osteogenic-Related Markers 44
3.5 Discussion 46
3.6 Conclusions 50
Chapter 4 Critical size calvarial defect model in Ds-Red pig 51
4.1 Abstract 51
4.2 Materials and proof of critical sized defect. 53
4.3 Discussion 55
Chapter 5 Transplantation of EGFP-pMSCs into calvarial defect of Ds-Red pig 57
5.1 Abstract 57
5.2 Materials and methods 58
5.2.1 Grouping 59
5.2.2 Operation 59
5.2.3 Preparation of the specimens 61
5.3 Result 62
5.3.1 In vivo fluorescence imaging 62
5.3.2 In vivo fluorescence quantification 64
5.3.3 Histological analysis 66
5.3.4 Immunohistochemistry 69
5.4 Statistical Analysis 74
5.5 Discussion 74
References 79
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Morphology and surface marker expression of EGFP-pMSCs. 3
Figure 1-2. Multilineage differentiation of EGFP-pMSCs in vitro. 4
Figure 1-3.Florescent and histological examination of infarcted hearts in
mice after EGFP-MSCs delivery repair for 2 weeks. 6
Figure 1-4. Shape of transIT-2020/plasmid BMP-2 complexes. 9
Figure 1-5. Osteogenesis profiles using alkaline phosphatase staining and 10
quantification assay. 10
Figure 1-6. Osteogenesis profiles using Alizarin red S staining and
quantification assay. 11
Figure 2-1. Property of the scaffold. 16
Figure 2-2. Green fluorescence expression of EGFP-pMSCs in the dishes. 17
Figure 2-3. Green fluorescence expression of EGFP-pMSCs in the scaffolds. 17
Figure 2-4. In vitro SEM analysis of EGFP-pMSCs in the scaffolds. 19
Figure 2-5. CLSM images of the in vitro distribution of EGFP-pMSCs in the 20
scaffolds. 20
Figure 2-6. Alkaline phosphatase staining and quantification analysis. 21
Figure 2-7. Alizarin red S staining and quantification analysis. 22
Figure 3-1: Optimization of cell viability in group 2. 35
Figure 3-2: Optimization of transfection efficiency in group 2. 35
Figure 3-3: Fluorescence evaluation after osteoinduction in monolayer
culture. 37
Figure 3-4: The coexistence of green fluorescence proteins and bone-like
nodules. 39
Figure 3-5: Morphology analysis and fluorescence evaluation after
Osteogenic induction in the 3-D scaffold. 40
Figure 3-6: Alkaline phosphatase staining and activity. 42
Figure 3-7: Alizarin red staining and activity. 43
Figure 3-8: Immunohistochemistry of osteogenic-related markers. 45
Figure 4-1. Expression of red fluorescence of Ds-Red pigs. 52
Figure 4-2. Differentiation potential of amniotic fluid progenitor stem cells
isolated from Ds-Red pigs. 53
Figure 4-3. Proof of critical sized defect. 54
Figure 4-4. Critical sized defect in pig calvarium. 55
Figure 5-1. Flowchart of transplantation of seeded cells into Ds-Red 58
Figure 5-2. Operation. 61
Figure 5-3. Retrieval of the specimens. 62
Figure 5-4. CLSM image of group 1 to 5 from week 1 to week 4. 63
Figure 5-5. In vivo fluorescence quantification. 65
Figure 5-6. In vivo Hematoxylin and eosin staining. 67
Figure 5-7. In vivo Masson’s trichrome staining. 68
Figure 5-8. Immunohistochemistry of CD 68. 70
Figure 5-9. Immunohistochemistry of OC. 71
Figure 5-10. Immunohistochemistry of BSP-II. 72
Figure 5-11. Immunohistochemistry of Col-I. 73
dc.language.isoen
dc.title以綠螢光豬骨髓間葉幹細胞異體移植入紅螢光豬於骨生成之應用-於支架中比較宿主細胞與移植細胞zh_TW
dc.titleBone regeneration in Ds-Red pig calvarial defect using allogenic transplantation of GFP pMSCs – a comparison of host cells and seeding cells in the scaffold
en
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear109-1
dc.description.degree博士
dc.contributor.author-orcid0000-0002-9154-8850
dc.contributor.advisor-orcid吳信志(0000-0001-8881-1550)
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee張麗冠(Li-Kwan Chang),蕭超隆(Chiaolong Hsiao),賴伯亮(Po-Liang Lai),胡育誠(Yu-Chen Hu),蔡宗廷(Tsung-Ting Tsai)
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee-orcid,蕭超隆(0000-0002-4576-0754),賴伯亮(0000-0002-2020-919X),胡育誠(0000-0002-9997-4467),蔡宗廷(0000-0002-7776-7627)
dc.subject.keyword骨髓間葉幹細胞,骨再生,綠螢光豬,紅螢光豬,豬頭蓋骨缺損,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordmesenchymal stem cell,bone regeneration,enhanced green fluorescent,DsRed pig,pig calvarial defect model,en
dc.relation.page101
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202004394
dc.rights.note未授權
dc.date.accepted2020-12-08
dc.contributor.author-college生物資源暨農學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept生物科技研究所zh_TW
Appears in Collections:生物科技研究所

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
U0001-0412202016440400.pdf
  Restricted Access
2.93 MBAdobe PDF
Show simple item record


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved