Table 5 Results of dermal injections of ASCs embedded in scaffolds
Author (year) [ref] | Scaffold material | Cells | Results from each study’s best scaffold for ASC delivery | Duration in vivo | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
In vitro | In vivo | ||||
Dong et al. (2014) [21] | aPEG + bSH − HA | ASCs | Cells are viable in the scaffold | Decreased wound contraction Re-epithelialization from the wound edges The scaffold retains the ASCs within the scaffold. No ASCs were found in host tissue Increased vascularization of the wounds | 3, 7, and 14 days |
Dong et al. (2017) [22] | aPEG + gelatin | ASCs | Cells are viable and proliferate in the scaffold The scaffolds mechanical strength decreased during 4 weeks of culture. ASCs regenerate the ECM network and maintain scaffold shape. | Cells are viable within the scaffold Faster wound healing Increased vascularization of the wounds | 4 weeks |
Machula et al. (2014) [30] | Electrospun tropoelastin | ASCs | The cells are compatible with the scaffold assessed by ASC morphology and deposition of ECM | Faster wound healing Thicker re-epithelization of wounds | 6 days |
Kim et al. (2016) [31] | ECM protein + methylcellulose | ASCs | Cells are viable and proliferate in the scaffold | Observed host infiltration of the scaffold No increased vascularization nor increased epithelial thickness of the wounds | 3 weeks |
Cheng et al. (2017) [32] | Chitosan/gelatin + cbFGF | ASCs | Cells are viable and proliferate in the scaffold 1.2% of the cells are released after 14 days | Increased vascularization HNA+ Cells in the wound 11 ± 3.2% CD31+ cells per power field | 5 days |