| |
DOG Congress Home
Program Changes
Registration
Invitations
Organization, Deadlines
Overview of the Congress
Scientific Programme
Scientific Programme
Highlights
Symposia
Courses
Satellite Programme
Information
Social Programme
Sponsors, Exhibitors
For the Press
DOG Homepage
|
|
AbstractDO.23.04 Towards prosthetic replacement of Bruchs membrane: Comparison of polyester and electrospun nanofiber substrates Stanzel B. V.1,2,3, Englander M.1, Thieltges F.3, Strick D. J.4, Blumenkranz M. S.1, Holz F. G.3, Binder S.2, Marmor M. F.1 1Department of Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; 2L. Boltzmann Institute for Retinology and Biomicroscopic Lasersurgery, Vienna, Austria; 3University Eye Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany; 4Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; 5Department of Ophthalmology, Rudolf Foundation Clinic, Vienna, Austria Objective: To explore two biocompatible substrates as candidates for Bruchs membrane prosthesis, which is an important adjunct for replacement strategies of the Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE). Methods: Polyester culture inserts (PET) are 10μm thick and permeable (Corning). Commercial electrospun polyamide nanofiber (EPN) inserts are adherent to impermeable plastic (Donaldson). The EPN can be detached from the plastic with ethanol to obtain free and thus permeable EPN. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) studies were performed on all growth substrates. Fetal and aged adult human RPE cells were cultured on above substrates. RPE proliferation parameters were studied on commercial EPN and glass. RPE marker proteins were studied using immunofluorescence and immunoblotting. Results: PET is a smooth surface with widely-spaced small pores; in contrast, EPN is a fibrillar meshwork with potential fluid transit everywhere. While total growth fractions were comparable on both substrates, DNA replication was increased on EPN as evidenced by higher BrdU incorporation. On PET, fetal cells remelanized and maintained a hexagonal monolayer over 3 months. Fetal cells grown on commercial (impermeable) EPN also showed typical RPE characteristics. In preliminary experiments, aged RPE showed better differentiation on commercial EPN than PET. Free (permeable) EPN was less supportive in most experiments, however modifications of the original setup gave promising results. Conclusions: Fibrillar, in contrast to flat, surfaces induce higher DNA replication in RPE. Permeable PET and impermeable EPN support differentiation of RPE cells. The fibrillar surface topology of EPN, which mimics native basement membranes and appears to rejuvenate aged RPE, makes it a promising component for BM prosthetics.
|
|