Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Primary cilia expression in bone marrow in response to mechanical stimulation in explant bioreactor culture.

Coughlin TR., Schiavi J., Alyssa Varsanik M., Voisin M., Birmingham E., Haugh MG.

Animal Study on Face & Skin, published in Eur Cell Mater (2016) — 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
Eur Cell Mater (2016)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
27434268
DOI
10.22203/ecm.v032a07

Abstract (original English)

Bone marrow contains a multitude of mechanically sensitive cells that may participate in mechanotransduction. Primary cilia are sensory organelles expressed on mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), osteoblasts, osteocytes, and other cell types that sense fluid flow in monolayer culture. In marrow, cilia could similarly facilitate the sensation of relative motion between adjacent cells or interstitial fluid. The goal of this study was to determine the response of cilia to mechanical stimulation of the marrow. Bioreactors were used to supply trabecular bone explants with low magnitude mechanical stimulation (LMMS) of 0.3 ×g at 30 Hz for 1 h/d, 5 d/week, inducing shear stresses in the marrow. Four groups were studied: unstimulated (UNSTIM), stimulated (LMMS), and with and without chloral hydrate (UNSTIM+CH and LMMS+CH, respectively), which was used to disrupt cilia. After 19 days of culture, immunohistochemistry for acetylated α-tubulin revealed that more cells expressed cilia in culture compared to in vivo controls. Stimulation decreased the number of cells expressing cilia in untreated explants, but not in CH-treated explants. MSCs represented a greater fraction of marrow cells in the untreated explants than CH-treated explants. MSCs harvested from the stimulated groups were more proliferative than in the unstimulated explants, but this effect was absent from CH treated explants. In co

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
AdipocytesAnimalsBioreactorsBone MarrowCalcification, PhysiologicCell DifferentiationChloral HydrateCiliaColony-Forming Units AssayFibroblasts

Browse all related research

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

Related research