RESEARCH INTERESTS: Cellular and molecular mechanisms of striated muscle physiopathology
Cancer cachexia
RESEARCH INTERESTS: Tissue engineering of skeletal muscle
Background and rationale.
Tissue engineering lies at the interface of regenerative medicine and developmental biology, and represent an innovative and multidisciplinary approach to build organs and tissues (Ingber and Levin, Development 2007). The skeletal muscle is a contractile tissue characterized by highly oriented bundles of giant syncytial cells (myofibers) and by mechanical resistance. Contractile, tissue-engineered skeletal muscle would be of significant benefit to patients with muscle deficits secondary to congenital anomalies, trauma, or surgery. Obvious limitations to this approach are the complexity of the musculature, composed of multiple tissues intimately intermingled and functionally interconnected, and the big dimensions of the majority of the muscles, which imply the involvement of an enormous amount of cells and rises problems of cell growth and survival (nutrition and oxygen delivery etc.). Two major approaches are followed to address these issues. Self-assembled skeletal muscle constructs are produced in vitro by delaminating sheets of cocultured myoblasts and fibroblasts, which results in contractile cylindrical “myooids.” Matrix-based approaches include placing cells into compacted lattices, seeding cells onto degradable polyglycolic acid sponges, seeding cells onto acellularized whole muscles, seeding cells into hydrogels, and seeding nonbiodegradable fiber sheets. Recently, decellularized matrix from cadaveric organs has been proven to be a good scaffold for cell repopulation to generate functional hearts in mice (Ott et al. Nature Medicine 2008).
I have obtained cultures of skeletal muscle cells on conductive surfaces, which is required to develop electronic device–muscle junctions for tissue engineering and medical applications1. I aim to exploit this system for either recording or stimulation of muscle cell biological activities, by exploiting the field effect transistor and capacitor potential of the conductive substratum-cell interface. Also, we are able to create patterned dispositions of molecules and cells on gold, which is important to mimic the highly oriented pattern myofibers show in vivo.
I have found that Static magnetic fields enhance skeletal muscle differentiation in vitro by improving myoblast alignment2. Static magnetic field (SMF) interacts with mammal skeletal muscle; however, SMF effects on skeletal muscle cells are poorly investigated. 80 +/- mT SMF generated by a custom-made magnet promotes myogenic cell differentiation and hypertrophy in vitro. Finally, we have transplanted acellular scaffolds to study the in vivo response to this biomaterial3, which we want to exploit for tissue culture and regenerative medicine of skeletal muscle.
The specific aims of my current research are:
1) to increase and optimize the production and alignment of myogenic cells and myotubes in vitro;
2) to manipulate the niche of muscle stem cells aimed at ameliorating their regenerative capacity in vivo;
3) to develop muscle-electrical devices interactions. We plan to exploit the cell culture system on conductive substrates for either recording or stimulation of muscle cell biological activities, by exploiting the field effect transistor and capacitor potential of the conductive substratum-cell interface.
5) to produce pre-assembled, off-the-shelf skeletal muscle. We are seeding acellularized muscle scaffold with various cell types, with the goal to obtain functional muscle with vascular supply and nerves.
REFERENCES
1) Coletti D. et al., J Biomed Mat Res 2009; 91(2):370-377.
2) Coletti D. et al., Cytometry A. 2007;71(10):846-56.
3) Perniconi B. et al. Biomaterials, 2011 in press
Cultures of myotubes on a conductive surface in a parallel orientation.
6/20/2011
Blind tasting session at the lab
To celebrate a few recent events (the UPMC Emergence 2011 grant, the Mol Endocrinol paper) and to welcome a new student in the lab, we have tasted five Bordeaux 2006 wines, from different appellations characterized by marked nuances of their terroirs and specific grape assembly. Given that the different wineyards are only about 50 Km from each other, the differences were outstanding.
Results of the blind tasting (panel : laboratory members):
1st Château-Haut Maurac, Médoc Cru Bourgeois (60 % Cabernet sauvignon, 40 % Merlot)
2nd Château Musset Chevalier , Saint Emillon Grand cru (50 % Merlot noir / 45 % Cabernet-Franc / 5 % Cabernet-Sauvignon )
3rd Les Hauts du Tertre, Margaux (55 % Cabernet sauvignon, 20 % Merlot, 20 % Cabernet franc, 5 % Petit verdot)
4th Château Prieuré-les-Tours, Graves.
We liked the winner for its intense bouquet of red fruits and its full body, with mature tannins and a long lasting aftertaste. One more cru Borgeois showing the great quality/price ratio of this category. From the color to the marked tannins it expressed the Medoc pretty well. However, I preferred the Margaux of Les Hauts de Tertre, a second wine produced by Château du Tertre, for its elegance and its more floreal bouquet. Margaux came out in the good balance between tannins, acidity and alcoolic warmth. The superb roundness of the Libournais St Emillon and the acidity of the Graves (Alas! - in such a poor interpretation) came out as well, but nobody guessed the crus for all the wines.
No comments:
Post a Comment