Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Comparison of Scaffold-free and Scaffold-based Reconstructed Human Skin Models as Alternatives to Animal Use

A Comparison of Scaffold-free and Scaffold-based Reconstructed Human Skin Models as Alternatives... Tissue engineered full-thickness human skin substitutes have various applications in the clinic and in the laboratory, such as in the treatment of burns or deep skin defects, and as reconstructed human skin models in the safety testing of drugs and cosmetics and in the fundamental study of skin biology and pathology. So far, different approaches have been proposed for the generation of reconstructed skin, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Here, the classic tissue engineering approach, based on cell-seeded polymeric scaffolds, is compared with the less-studied cell self-assembly approach, where the cells are coaxed to synthesise their own extracellular matrix (ECM). The resulting full-thickness human skin substitutes were analysed by means of histological and immunohistochemical analyses. It was found that both the scaffold-free and the scaffold-based skin equivalents successfully mimicked the functionality and morphology of native skin, with complete epidermal differentiation (as determined by the expression of filaggrin), the presence of a continuous basement membrane expressing collagen VII, and new ECM deposition by dermal fibroblasts. On the other hand, the scaffold-free model had a thicker epidermis and a significantly higher number of Ki67-positive proliferative cells, indicating a higher capacity for self-renewal, as compared to the scaffold-based model. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Alternatives to Laboratory Animals SAGE

A Comparison of Scaffold-free and Scaffold-based Reconstructed Human Skin Models as Alternatives to Animal Use

Kinikoglu, Beste
Alternatives to Laboratory Animals , Volume 45 (6): 8 – Dec 1, 2017
Download PDF
8 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/a-comparison-of-scaffold-free-and-scaffold-based-reconstructed-human-j6diBicXur

References (30)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 2017 Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments
ISSN
0261-1929
eISSN
2632-3559
DOI
10.1177/026119291704500607
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Tissue engineered full-thickness human skin substitutes have various applications in the clinic and in the laboratory, such as in the treatment of burns or deep skin defects, and as reconstructed human skin models in the safety testing of drugs and cosmetics and in the fundamental study of skin biology and pathology. So far, different approaches have been proposed for the generation of reconstructed skin, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Here, the classic tissue engineering approach, based on cell-seeded polymeric scaffolds, is compared with the less-studied cell self-assembly approach, where the cells are coaxed to synthesise their own extracellular matrix (ECM). The resulting full-thickness human skin substitutes were analysed by means of histological and immunohistochemical analyses. It was found that both the scaffold-free and the scaffold-based skin equivalents successfully mimicked the functionality and morphology of native skin, with complete epidermal differentiation (as determined by the expression of filaggrin), the presence of a continuous basement membrane expressing collagen VII, and new ECM deposition by dermal fibroblasts. On the other hand, the scaffold-free model had a thicker epidermis and a significantly higher number of Ki67-positive proliferative cells, indicating a higher capacity for self-renewal, as compared to the scaffold-based model.

Journal

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals – SAGE

Published: Dec 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.