Morphological, functional and biochemical characterization of canine gingival fibroblasts

As dogs are good models for in vivo studies, it is interesting to evaluate the behavior of canine gingival fibroblasts (CGF) in vitro, so that these cells could be seeded on a matrix and later studied in vivo. The aim of this study was to perform a morphological, functional and biochemical analysis...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBrazilian dental journal Vol. 24; no. 2; p. 128
Main Authors Pelegrini, Camila Bonvicino, Maia, Luciana Prado, de Souza, Sérgio Luís Scombatti, Taba, Jr, Mário, Palioto, Daniela Bazan
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Brazil 2013
Subjects
Animals
Cell Adhesion - physiology
Cell Count
Cell Culture Techniques
Cell Movement - physiology
Cell Shape
Cell Survival - physiology
Cells, Cultured
Dogs
Fibroblasts - cytology
Fibroblasts - metabolism
Fibroblasts - physiology
Gingiva - cytology
Humans
Models, Animal
Primary Cell Culture
Proteins - analysis
Time Factors
Tissue Engineering - methods
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

More Information
Summary:As dogs are good models for in vivo studies, it is interesting to evaluate the behavior of canine gingival fibroblasts (CGF) in vitro, so that these cells could be seeded on a matrix and later studied in vivo. The aim of this study was to perform a morphological, functional and biochemical analysis of CGF, comparing it with human gingival fibroblasts (HGF), as well as to evaluate the change of their characteristics over several passages. Using gingival fibroblasts from 3 dogs and 3 humans in the subculture (Sub), first (P1), third (P3), fifth (P5) and seventh (P7) passages, the following parameters were assessed: cell morphology, spreading, adhesion, viability and total protein content. The results showed no major differences between the passages in terms of morphology and spreading, and a tendency of greater adhesion and viability for HGF when compared with CGF. The total protein content was significantly higher for HGF. HGF exhibited greater functional and biochemical activity in vitro compared to CGF. Higher numbers at Sub were observed for both CGF and HGF in all evaluated parameters. The differences do not prevent the use of CGF for tissue engineering, but its use seems to be more appropriate in the subculture or first passage.
ISSN:1806-4760