Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Mechanotransduction of vocal fold fibroblasts and mesenchymal stromal cells in the context of the vocal fold mechanome.

Bartlett RS., Gaston JD., Ye S., Kendziorski C., Thibeault SL.

Laboratory Study, published in J Biomech (2018) — 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
J Biomech (2018)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
30553439
PMCID
PMC6326878
DOI
10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.11.050
Citations
8

Abstract (original English)

The design of cell-based therapies for vocal fold tissue engineering requires an understanding of how cells adapt to the dynamic mechanical forces found in the larynx. Our objective was to compare mechanotransductive processes in therapeutic cell candidates (mesenchymal stromal cells from adipose tissue and bone marrow, AT-MSC and BM-MSC) to native cells (vocal fold fibroblasts-VFF) in the context of vibratory strain. A bioreactor was used to expose VFF, AT-MSC, and BM-MSC to axial tensile strain and vibration at human physiological levels. Microarray, an empirical Bayes statistical approach, and geneset enrichment analysis were used to identify significant mechanotransductive pathways associated with the three cell types and three mechanical conditions. Two databases (Gene Ontology, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) were used for enrichment analyses. VFF shared more mechanotransductive pathways with BM-MSC than with AT-MSC. Gene expression that appeared to distinguish the vibratory strain condition from polystyrene condition for these two cells types related to integrin activation, focal adhesions, and lamellipodia activity, suggesting that vibratory strain may be associated with cytoarchitectural rearrangement, cell reorientation, and extracellular matrix remodeling. In response to vibration and tensile stress, BM-MSC better mimicked VFF mechanotransduction than AT-MSC

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
Bayes TheoremExtracellular MatrixFibroblastsHumansMechanotransduction, CellularMesenchymal Stem CellsStress, MechanicalTissue EngineeringVibrationVocal Cords

Browse all related research

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