Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

A preliminary study on the development of a novel biomatrix by decellularization of bovine spinal meninges for tissue engineering applications.

Ozudogru E., Arslan YE.

Animal Study with a reported sample of 3 on Face & Skin, Back & Spine, published in Cell Tissue Bank (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
Animal Study
Journal
Cell Tissue Bank (2020)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
3
Source database
PubMed
PMID
32862393
DOI
10.1007/s10561-020-09859-8

Abstract (original English)

Here, we aim at developing a novel biomatrix from decellularized bovine spinal meninges for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine applications. Within this concept, the bovine spinal meninges were decellularized using 1% Triton X-100 for 48 h, and residual nuclear content was determined with double-strand DNA content analysis and agarose gel electrophoresis. The major matrix components such as sulfated GAGs and collagen before and after the decellularization process were analyzed with DMMB, hydroxyproline assay and SDS-PAGE. Subsequently, the native bovine spinal meninges (nBSM) and decellularized BSM (dBSM) were physiochemically characterized via ATR-FTIR spectroscopy, TGA, DMA and tensile strength test. The dsDNA content in the nBSM was 153.39 ± 53.93 ng/mg dry weight, versus in the dBSM was 39.47 ± 4.93 ng/mg (n = 3) dry weight and DNA fragments of more than 200 bp in length were not detected in the dBSM by agarose gel electrophoresis. The sulfated GAGs contents for nBSM and dBSM were observed to be 10.87 ± 1.2 and 11.42 ± 2.01 μg/mg dry weight, respectively. The maximum strength of dBSM in dry and wet conditions was found to be 19.67 ± 0.21 MPa and 13.97 ± 0.17 MPa, while nBSM (dry) was found to be 26.26 ± 0.28 MPa. MTT, SEM, and histology results exhibited that the cells attached to the surface of dBSM, and proliferated on the dBSM. In conclusion, the in vitro preli

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
AnimalsCattleCollagenExtracellular MatrixMeningesRegenerative MedicineTissue EngineeringTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

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

Related research