The authors have no conflict of interest
Shockwave Stimulates Oxygen Radical-Mediated Osteogenesis of the Mesenchymal Cells From Human Umbilical Cord Blood†
Article first published online: 19 JAN 2004
Copyright © 2004 ASBMR
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Volume 19, Issue 6, pages 973–982, June 2004
How to Cite
Wang, F.-S., Yang, K. D., Wang, C.-J., Huang, H.-C., Chio, C.-C., Hsu, T.-Y. and Ou, C.-Y. (2004), Shockwave Stimulates Oxygen Radical-Mediated Osteogenesis of the Mesenchymal Cells From Human Umbilical Cord Blood. J Bone Miner Res, 19: 973–982. doi: 10.1359/JBMR.040121
- Issue published online: 2 DEC 2009
- Article first published online: 19 JAN 2004
- Manuscript Accepted: 16 JAN 2004
- Manuscript Revised: 29 OCT 2003
- Manuscript Received: 17 JAN 2003
- mesenchymal progenitor cells;
- human umbilical cord blood;
- growth factor;
Human umbilical cord blood (HUCB) mesenchymal progenitor cells expressed stro-1 or CD44 or CD29, and subsequently, differentiated toward osteogenic lineage. Physical shockwave treatment increased osteogenic activity of HUCB mesenchymal progenitor cells through superoxide-mediated TGF-β1 induction. Transplantation of shockwave-treated HUCB mesenchymal progenitor cells enhanced healing of segmental femoral defect in severe combined immunodeficiency disease (SCID) mice.
Introduction: Mesenchymal progenitor cells (MPCs) in the bone marrow are precursors to bone development. It remains uncertain whether MPCs are present in human umbilical cord blood (HUCB) and are capable of differentiating into osteogenic cell lineage. Extending from a model of shockwave (SW) promotion of bone marrow stromal cell differentiation toward osteoprogenitors in rats, we further investigated how physical SW mediated biological responses in regulating osteogenic differentiation of HUCB MPCs.
Materials and Methods: HUCB was subjected to SW treatment at different energy flux densities and impulses. Colony-forming units-stroma (CFU-Stroma), osteogenic activities (Cbfa1/Runx2 expression, bone alkaline phosphatase activity, and bone nodule formation), and bone formation by heterologous transplantation into SCID mice were assessed.
Results: Few CD34+ stem cells (1.3%) and stro-1+ cells (1.0%) were present in the freshly prepared mononuclear cells (MNCs) from HUCB. The number of stro-1+ cells, but not CD34+, increased to 72.4% in the adherent cell culture over 6 days. Stro-1+ cells co-expressed CD44 and CD29 markers and grew into CFU-Stroma that matured into bone nodules. We found that the SW treatment (0.16 mJ/mm2 energy flux density, 200 impulses) elicited superoxide production and promoted formation of CFU-Stroma, but not of hematopoietic CFU-Mix. SW also enhanced the production of transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1, but not of interleukin (IL)-3 or granulocyte monocyte-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Neutralization of TGF-β1 significantly reduced SW-promoted CFU-Stroma formation. Superoxide scavenging by superoxide dismutase blocked SW enhancement of TGF-β1 production and formation of CFU-Stroma. Administration of SW-treated HUCB MPCs to SCID mice with femoral segmental defects facilitated dense, bridging callus and gap closure.
Conclusion: HUCB MPCs subjected to SW treatment is a potential source for stem cells useful in the treatment of orthopedic disorders. An optimal physical SW treatment enhanced osteogenesis through superoxide-mediated TGF-β1 production. Physical stimulation is an alternative method for extending mesenchymal stem cells of HUCB.