Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Impact of Isolation Procedures on the Development of a Preclinical Synovial Fibroblasts/Macrophages in an In Vitro Model of Osteoarthritis

Manferdini C., Saleh Y., Dolzani P., Gabusi E., Trucco D., Filardo G.

Laboratory Study on Osteoarthritis, Chronic Inflammation, published in Biology (Basel) (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
Biology (Basel) (2020)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
33321965
PMCID
PMC7764613
DOI
10.3390/biology9120459
Citations
7

Abstract (original English)

There is a lack ofin vitromodels able to properly represent osteoarthritis (OA) synovial tissue (ST). We aimed to characterize OA ST and to investigate whether a mechanical or enzymatic digestion procedures influence synovial cell functional heterogeneity in vitro. Procedures using mechanical nondigested fragments (NDF), synovial digested fragments (SDF), and filtrated synovial digested cells (SDC) were compared. An immunophenotypic profile was performed to distinguish synovial fibroblasts (CD55, CD73, CD90, CD106), macrophages (CD14, CD68), M1-like (CD80, CD86), and M2-like (CD163, CD206) synovial macrophages. Pro-inflammatory (interleukin 6 IL6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), chemokine C-C motif ligand 3 (CCL3/MIP1α), C-X- motif chemokine ligand 10 (CXCL10/IP10) and anti-inflammatory (interleukin 10 (IL10)), transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1), C-C motif chemokine ligand 18 (CCL18) cytokines were evaluated. CD68 and CD163 markers were higher in NDF and SDF compared to the SDC procedure, while CD80, CD86, and CD206 were higher only in NDF compared to the SDC procedure. Synovial fibroblast markers showed similar percentages. TNFα, CCL3/MIP1α, CXCL10/IP10, and CCL18 were higher in NDF compared to SDC, but not compared to SDF. IL10 and TGFβ1 were higher in NDF than SDC at the molecular level, while IL6 did not show differences among procedures. We demonstrated that ND

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research