Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 | Science : Medicine | print version Print | Comments |

Video Transplant of windpipe grown from stem cells heralds new era in medicine

Roger Highfield, Telegraph

Reposted from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/3486000/Transplant-of-windpipe-grown-from-stem-cells-heralds-new-era-in-medicine.html
and
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/19/organ-grown-from-stem-cel_n_145049.html



The transplant of a human windpipe grown from stem cells is a surgical breakthrough of almost limitless potential

The science of healing is developing so quickly that it has become almost a cliché to describe a particular operation as a "breakthrough". Yet there is no doubt that the first successful transplant of a human windpipe, constructed partly from stem cells, is an astonishing milestone – one that could indeed mark the start of a new era in medicine.

At long last, the glint in a researcher's eye has been turned into a significant advance in the clinic. Forget all the fuss about embryos and angst about playing God: this is unadulterated good news. We have proved that scientists can now fashion organs using a patient's own cells, eliminating the problems with rejection that have always plagued transplants. Today it is a trachea – tomorrow it could be a colon, even a heart.

The venture was a textbook example of international collaboration, drawing on the talents of teams in Spain, Italy and Britain. To recap; the operation, on 30-year-old tuberculosis patient Claudia Castillo, took place in Barcelona, where doctors also had collected a three-inch segment of trachea from a 51-year-old donor who had died of a cerebral hemorrhage. They used a technique developed in Padua to strip the windpipe of its donor's original cells, a procedure that took six weeks, to create a "scaffold". At the same time, a team in Bristol used a "bioreactor" dreamt up in Milan to grow stem cells removed from Castillo's bone marrow. These cells were "seeded" into the donated windpipe, disguising the 'foreign' tissue that remained so Castillo's body would accept it as her own.

There is a desperate need for this kind of advance. In Britain, about 8,000 people are on the waiting list for an organ transplant. Around 3,200 such operations are carried out every year – but roughly 1,000 of those on the list will die before they get a transplant. And that is only the start of the problem: after a transplant, there is a high risk of rejection as the recipient's immune system reacts against the donor organ. Immunosuppressant drugs are used to limit this but their side-effects include high blood pressure, diabetes and kidney failure, vulnerability to infections, osteoporosis, and cancer. In all, the drugs cut life expectancy by an average of 10 years.

As we now know, Claudio Castillo experienced no such problems: two months after the surgery, which took place in June, her lungs were functioning just as well as those of most young women her age. The result, says Martin Birchall, professor of surgery at Bristol University, leaves us "on the verge of a new age in surgical care". But what will that new age look like? Even before this week's announcement, there has been a steady trickle of advances that reveal the potential of this medical revolution. There are attempts to free insulin-dependent diabetics from reliance on needles, by using injections of their own stem cells. Trials are under way in Britain on more than 90 patients to test the use of stem cells to help repair damaged hearts. Prof John Martin of University College London who is leading the project, says things are "going well".

We can now routinely grow replacement skin (used to aid wound healing), using the foreskins of newborns, while Dr Anthony Atala, of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, has made and successfully implanted segments of bladder in seven patients, aged between four and 19, who had a congenital birth defect.

Dr Atala's technique is a variation on that used to create Claudia Castillo's new windpipe. He began by taking biopsy samples of muscle cells and the cells that line the bladder walls. These were multiplied in the laboratory until there were enough to seed a special biodegradable "scaffold", shaped like a bladder, on which the cells could hang. About eight weeks after the biopsy, the "engineered" patches were sewn on to the patients' original bladders, dramatically improving their function.

The significance of the new work, however, is that the pan-European team was able to transplant an organ, albeit just a section of it. The implications are staggering: given that stem cells from bone marrow can be grown into any one family of tissues, such as muscle, bone, skin and cartilage (though not mucosal or nerve tissues), the team at Bristol University believes the same approach will allow it to recreate colons and bladders, too. With funding, Prof Birchall says that he hopes to engineer a larynx for transplant within five years.

The liver will be trickier. The plumbing and cells involved are intricate and the result of an equally complex series of stages of development. The process is further complicated by the fact that the liver also needs to have blood pumping through it at high pressure and volume to work properly. Even so, the science-fiction vision of organ farms in which spare body parts can be plucked off the rack may not be so far-fetched. "I do believe the various issues are soluble," said Prof Birchall, though he is reluctant to speculate on precisely when.

In much of this work, Europe is leading the way. "By putting our brains together," says Prof Martin, "we are ahead of the US in the clinical application of stem cells."
But remarkable work on the other side of the Atlantic is raising the possibility that the development of a replacement heart is closer to fruition than previously hoped. In January, the world's first beating, retooled "bioartificial heart" was unveiled by researchers at the University of Minnesota, an achievement that could pave the way for new treatments for the 22 million people worldwide who live with heart failure.

While there had been advances in growing heart tissue in the lab, the problem has been how to create a three-dimensional scaffold for the new cells that mimics the complicated architecture and intricacies of the body's circulatory system. That is why Prof Doris Taylor and her team in Minnesota resorted to "decellularisation": using detergent to remove all of the cells from an organ. In this case, they used the heart from an animal cadaver, leaving only the framework between the cells intact, along with the essential plumbing and heart valves.
After successfully removing all the cells from rat hearts, the researchers then took immature versions of those cells and introduced them to the decellularised heart scaffolds. Four days later, contractions were observed, and eight days later the new, partly artificial hearts were pumping, albeit at only two per cent of the efficiency of an adult heart.

Professor Taylor says that she is thrilled by the news of the trachea transplant. "We congratulate the Bristol team wholeheartedly – so to speak – and are excited to see this add credence to the technology used by our group in its research, and others around the world." The method, she believes, can be extended to virtually any organ with a blood supply: "We have made significant progress showing the utility of decellularisation for a number of organs including livers, muscle, skin and kidneys, and are well on the way to building complex new organs." Her own team is tackling the problems involved in rebuilding the vessels in the heart – critical if you are going to engineer something with a blood supply.

And then there is the astonishing potential of embryonic stem cells, the means by which Mother Nature fashions our entire bodies. Our understanding of how to guide the development of an embryonic stem cell is primitive – but unlike the bone marrow cells used in the Castillo case, embryonic stem cells can turn into any one of the 200 or more different cell types in our bodies, rendering the opportunities potentially limitless. As Prof Austin Smith of Cambridge University points out, much more work must be done to determine how to make them grow the right way, and then to mould them into organs. Even so, the potential in terms of replacement body parts – or even replacement bodies – is vast.

The path ahead is difficult: more funding and much testing, will be needed and there will inevitably be false starts and blind alleys. But in the long term, a brave new world beckons, where row upon row of hearts, kidneys and lungs are grown in sterile vessels, ready for transplant. Medically and ethically, the bottom line is simple: if we follow the path blazed by Claudia Castillo and her doctors, no one need ever die waiting for a donated organ again.

• Roger Highfield is the Editor of 'New Scientist'

Comments 1 - 39 of 39 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #287129 by Evilcor on November 19, 2008 at 7:40 pm

 avatarCouldn't help but notice the lack of American involvement.
Thank you W. Hope you're satisfied. This is only the beginning of European dominance of the U.S. in the biological sciences.
Remember Lysenko? He's laughing somewhere. . .

We're in the game still, but damn, eight lost years.
Feels like a bad marriage is ending.

Other Comments by Evilcor

2. Comment #287132 by j.mills on November 19, 2008 at 7:42 pm

 avatar
We can now routinely grow replacement skin (used to aid wound healing), using the foreskins of newborns
Ouch! That seems a bit unsporting...

Impressive stuff though. Mind you, as mentioned, a windpipe is a much more straightforward structure than organs like livers and kidneys. I'd imagine we're still a couple of decades away from that stuff. (And if I'm wrong, who'll remember? :) )

Other Comments by j.mills

3. Comment #287154 by MedMonkey on November 19, 2008 at 8:17 pm

 avatarNotice above that embryonic stem cells were not used in this case. No one around the world is superior yet in the regard of manipulating embryonic stem cells, so I wouldn't fret about the US being too far behind. We definitely aren't being dominated in the field, although this is a significant breakthrough.

I think what we can look forward to most in the next 8 years is more government moneys for US involvement in international collaboration. This technology is for the benefit of all, and we should see returns on our investments.

Other Comments by MedMonkey

4. Comment #287155 by Dhamma on November 19, 2008 at 8:17 pm

 avatarThis is so exciting!

Will we be able to die in the future?

Other Comments by Dhamma

5. Comment #287158 by Brian English on November 19, 2008 at 8:18 pm

 avatarDhamma, I guarantee it. I'll personally kill you if you don't kark it after a reasonable period. Does that sooth your worries?

Other Comments by Brian English

6. Comment #287165 by Dhamma on November 19, 2008 at 8:23 pm

 avatarPhew, now that's a sigh of relief, Brian!

Don't want to spend an eternity with all religious loonies here on earth, so death and hell is my only saviour.

Other Comments by Dhamma

7. Comment #287195 by N. Fidel on November 19, 2008 at 8:46 pm

It is even debated, according to NPR's report earlier on The World, whether stem cells were necessary at all. It may have been possible to graft healthy, replicated trachea cells from the donee to the stripped donor trachea rather than use the donee's stem cells, which were harvested from her bone marrow.

Notwithstanding, it's about time this country (the US) reverse that fatuous veto of W's and legalize embryonic stem cell research. I doubt Obama is reading this post, though.

Other Comments by N. Fidel

8. Comment #287199 by DiveMedic on November 19, 2008 at 8:47 pm

How incredibly cool is this?

Medicine - 3409857340985730498327533409587

Prayer - 0

Other Comments by DiveMedic

9. Comment #287223 by Titania on November 19, 2008 at 9:21 pm

 avatarEditorial
Nature 456, 282 (20 November 2008) | doi:10.1038/456282a; Published online 19 November 2008

Stem-cell futures

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v456/n7220/full/456282a.html

Other Comments by Titania

10. Comment #287286 by SilentMike on November 20, 2008 at 12:46 am

Medical science marches on forward. It's almost unfortunate that this wasn't done using embryonic stem cells. We'll see how the fundies hold out when western europe starts manufacturing hearts.

Other Comments by SilentMike

11. Comment #287289 by sunbeamforjesus on November 20, 2008 at 12:56 am

This is truly exciting work.If Obama's scientific advisors do not keep him fully informed of breakthroughs of this importance they are no better than those of the 'Lipstick Pig who hates fruitflies'.The scientific community in the U.S.should take it upon THEMSELVES to ensure that he is fully conversant with all achievements and research.

Other Comments by sunbeamforjesus

12. Comment #287290 by jeroen on November 20, 2008 at 12:59 am

>We can now routinely grow replacement skin (used to aid wound healing), using the foreskins of newborns

Finally - a good reason for circumcision. If they use it for the same baby they take it from, of course.

Other Comments by jeroen

13. Comment #287351 by Polaris29 on November 20, 2008 at 3:06 am

 avatar
Remember Lysenko? He's laughing somewhere. . .

I don't get it.
What does Lysenko have to do with this? His work was total pseudo-science.

Other Comments by Polaris29

14. Comment #287372 by Katana on November 20, 2008 at 3:48 am

 avatar#3
embryonic cells may have not been used for the procedure but adult stem cells aren't as good quality or as numerous (when harvesting) as embryonic ones are, all stem cell experiments still have to be done on embryonic stem cells before they can be done with adult ones to show they will work under ideal conditions.
Though i hope further research in the area will make embryonic unneeded and end the controversy so we can advance.

Other Comments by Katana

15. Comment #287373 by Brian English on November 20, 2008 at 3:51 am

 avatarThe thing about stem cells is that the scientists who work on them know what they need. If they need embryonic stem-cells, then who are the rest of us to tell them that they should use adult stem cells? To say that they can do it with adult cells, is not our place. Let the scientists work that out.

Other Comments by Brian English

16. Comment #287377 by steveroot on November 20, 2008 at 4:09 am

 avatarThis is not my personal are of expertise, but there is some pretty cool stuff going on at my dental school.
http://tigger.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/newsbureau/cgi-bin/index.cgi?from=Releases&to=Release&id=2229&start=1207862111&end=1215638111&topic=0&dept=0
Steve

Other Comments by steveroot

17. Comment #287378 by ridethespud on November 20, 2008 at 4:21 am

"Notwithstanding, it's about time this country (the US) reverse that fatuous veto of W's and legalize embryonic stem cell research. I doubt Obama is reading this post, though."

Don't worry Fidel, he is already on it:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=6215451

Other Comments by ridethespud

18. Comment #287380 by Degsy on November 20, 2008 at 4:23 am

Nobel prize winning stuff. Lets hear it for science.

Other Comments by Degsy

19. Comment #287392 by Ian Bamlett on November 20, 2008 at 5:17 am

 avatarwell sure it's impressive but this would all be moot if we could keep brainless clones of ourselves in the basement and pull it out whenever we need a spare part.

Other Comments by Ian Bamlett

20. Comment #287399 by MedMonkey on November 20, 2008 at 5:46 am

 avatarThere's no need for full clones when we can get individulaized organs from the Tleilaxu ... wait, I have my universes confused again.

The executive order against government funding of embryonic stem cells is one of the first Obama will countermand. He's made his position on the subject very clear, but don't expect immediate returns. Most of the breakthroughs aren't being made with ebryonic stem cells, but with adult stem cells. The role of embryonic stem cells in this burgeoning technology remains to be seen. Still, more money for reserach can never hurt! I look forward to the US being at the international table on this one :)

Other Comments by MedMonkey

21. Comment #287437 by MRA on November 20, 2008 at 7:20 am

 avatarI agree with Degsy, "Nobel prize winning stuff". Really nice to see a direct application after years of research and testing.

Other Comments by MRA

22. Comment #287448 by hungarianelephant on November 20, 2008 at 7:47 am

 avatar1. Comment #287129 by Evilcor on November 19, 2008 at 7:40 pm
Thank you W. Hope you're satisfied. This is only the beginning of European dominance of the U.S. in the biological sciences.

I wouldn't bank on it. Research on embryonic stem cells is also illegal in that well known bastion of religious conservatism, Germany. Unless they were harvested outside Germany. Before 2007.

It's a very strange way of thinking. "We object to using embryos on ethical grounds. Unless they aren't German, in which case it's perfectly ok." Huh?

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

23. Comment #287452 by jeremynel on November 20, 2008 at 7:59 am

Wonderful news. But please, no priests. No stem cell opposers of any sort, in fact. Let no one who threw lobbied for bans on stem cell research be allowed to reap the benefits.

Just kidding. Despite their stone-aged opposition to such life-saving research, it would be evil to deny them a cure. If only they had the same feeling! It does rather indicate who has the moral high ground on this one, doesn't it?

Other Comments by jeremynel

24. Comment #287481 by Romaholic on November 20, 2008 at 8:47 am

Comment #287392 by Ian Bamlett on November 20, 2008 at 5:17 am

well sure it's impressive but this would all be moot if we could keep brainless clones of ourselves in the basement and pull it out whenever we need a spare part.

What if you needed a brain, I wonder'

Anyway, brilliant news. I only hope it's put into use, without people being offended.

Other Comments by Romaholic

25. Comment #287510 by Philster61 on November 20, 2008 at 9:40 am

Hope they will be able to use stem cells to cure diabetics.Ill be very happy when they do.

Other Comments by Philster61

26. Comment #287526 by Ishruul on November 20, 2008 at 10:00 am

 avatarI call heresy on these blasphemous stem cell. How come something like that pass by the Catholic Inquisition Squad and Tactic (cyst for short).

They should ban such repulsive medical treatment. People should die for a lack of windpipe, just like God intented.

And remember kids, prayers heal everything and when you cought, it's just God breathing through you!

Other Comments by Ishruul

27. Comment #287527 by FatherNature on November 20, 2008 at 10:02 am

 avatar
They used a technique developed in Padua to strip the windpipe of its donor's original cells, a procedure that took six weeks, to create a "scaffold".


When I saw this story on TV last night they said the same thing and it confused me. If they stripped the original cells, what was left from the donor's windpipe? Did they just strip some percentage of the cells? Or, as mentioned in the video, did they only strip the antigens? Can anyone clarify this?

Other Comments by FatherNature

28. Comment #287540 by Sarmatae1 on November 20, 2008 at 10:22 am

 avatar
12. Comment #287290 by jeroen on November 20, 2008 at 12:59 am
>We can now routinely grow replacement skin (used to aid wound healing), using the foreskins of newborns

Finally - a good reason for circumcision. If they use it for the same baby they take it from, of course.


Actually there is a little known use for foreskins. Doctors used to turn them into wallets, when the wallet was vigorously rubbed they doubled as brief cases also. FYI

Other Comments by Sarmatae1

29. Comment #287607 by aquilacane on November 20, 2008 at 11:45 am

 avatarGood, except foreskin, still against that, unless medically required.

Other Comments by aquilacane

30. Comment #287610 by phil rimmer on November 20, 2008 at 11:49 am

 avatarComment #287527 by FatherNature:
If they stripped the original cells, what was left from the donor's windpipe?


Collagen...structural stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collagen

Other Comments by phil rimmer

31. Comment #287614 by steveroot on November 20, 2008 at 11:53 am

 avatar
27. Comment #287527 by FatherNature on November 20, 2008 at 10:02 am

They used a technique developed in Padua to strip the windpipe of its donor's original cells, a procedure that took six weeks, to create a "scaffold".

If they stripped the original cells, what was left from the donor's windpipe?

The trachea is mostly cartilage, which is fairly acellular:
(from http://www.lab.anhb.uwa.edu.au/mb140/CorePages/Respiratory/respir.htm#LARYNX)
Tracheal cartilages

The trachea is stabilised by 16-20 C-shaped cartilages (hyaline cartilage). The free dorsal ends of the cartilages are connected by bands of smooth muscle (trachealis muscle) and connective tissue fibres. Longitudinal collagenous and elastic connective tissue fibres (annular ligaments) link the individual cartilages and allow both the lengthening and shortening of the trachea for example during swallowing or movements of the neck. They are inseparable from the fibres of the perichondrium. The tracheal cartilages may ossify with age.

Cartilages, annular ligaments and the trachealis muscle form the "skeleton" of the trachea which sometimes is referred to as tunica fibromusculocartilaginea. If you want to impress someone with this term make sure that you can pronounce and/or spell it.


A "scaffold" can be any tissue-compatible material that will serve to support (duh) the new cells, and ideally has the same basic shape as the future part. Here at UIC there have been some temporomandibular joint parts made this way. We also have had success using blood clots inside teeth as scaffolds for new tissue growth, so in some cases teeth with degenerated pulps have been re-vascularized (not just at UIC).
Ste5e

Other Comments by steveroot

32. Comment #287617 by steveroot on November 20, 2008 at 12:00 pm

 avatar
28. Comment #287540 by Sarmatae1 on November 20, 2008 at 10:22 am

Actually there is a little known use for foreskins. Doctors used to turn them into wallets, when the wallet was vigorously rubbed they doubled as brief cases also. FYI

Yes, and there was an unfortunate case of a researcher who made a coat of foreskins. The fit and finish were fine, but a pretty woman walked by and the guy was strangled.

I'll get my (cloth) coat, but first:

Q: Did you see the advert for the job at the zoo circumcising elephants?
A: Yes. The salary isn't much, but the tips are great.

*Leaves in a hurry*
Ste5e

Other Comments by steveroot

33. Comment #287618 by FatherNature on November 20, 2008 at 12:08 pm

 avatarphil rimmer and steveroot

Thanks for the links. I thought everything solid in the body was made of cells.

That's what happens when you study electronics instead of biology.

Other Comments by FatherNature

34. Comment #287679 by Stafford Gordon on November 20, 2008 at 1:34 pm

It's all very well, but I don't suppose god thinks much of it; she could end up redundant.

Oh, come to think of it, we could do with more of the same then!

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

35. Comment #287868 by Titania on November 20, 2008 at 7:49 pm

 avatarStem cells drafted for war on wounds

http://www.nature.com/stemcells/2008/0811/081113/full/stemcells.2008.148.html

Other Comments by Titania

36. Comment #287885 by TexasRanger on November 20, 2008 at 9:15 pm

 avatarI wonder if any of the religious folks out there who have the same health problems would care to try this.

And I wonder what the church would say to the lady who received the treatment. "Die! Heathen with the wicked windpipe."

Other Comments by TexasRanger

37. Comment #287889 by MPhil on November 20, 2008 at 9:29 pm

 avatarhungarianelephant,

thankfully, the situation in Germany has changed. The people who want to restrict research unreasonably are in the minority. The "place of origin" thing was - as I suppose you ought to know - a matter of legal "trickery", not ideological dogmatism. When the place of origin is outside Germany and thus the legal interest is foreign, German jurisdiction is not responsible - those that were acquired in legal transactions can be used. The limit concerning the year is so that no new embryonic stem-cells will be acquired until a better law comes along, because this is a matter of constitutional delicacy. Still, it's a shame that they can't make up their mind. But it's definitely not about nationalism.

Furthermore, and most importantly, they recently moved up the limit so that more stem-cell research would be legal until further decision.

In addition to that, as I said, many people do not want such restrictive laws, just as many do not want the unreasonably restrictive laws on doctor-assisted suicide. Political initiatives are gaining weight to change this - for example allow for research with embryonic stem-cells extracted from the umbilical chord.

But, sadly, international contracts and traditional German law see to it that in the important ethics-counsels, whose opinions courts seek to make their decisions, many positions are filled with clerics. The influence of the roman catholic and lutheran protestant churches on German politics and law is a very sad story.

Some time ago, I wrote a blog-entry about that.
If I may be allowed to shameless plug my blog - this is the url:

http://mphil.livejournal.com/3093.html#cutid1

Other Comments by MPhil

38. Comment #287914 by hungarianelephant on November 21, 2008 at 12:49 am

 avatarMPhil - You'll get no argument from me on the subject of the interference of religion.

I don't think you have the rules on stem cells right, though. There was a recent change in the law - to allow stem cells harvested abroad between 2002 and 2007 to be used in research. It's still illegal to harvest embryonic stem cells in Germany, or use ones harvested recently. As you say, you can at least do research on what you have.

My German being appalling, I am only reading this from English-language sources, but that is also what my colleagues are being told by lawyers in Germany.

I appreciate that it is a matter of legal trickery, but it's hardly one we can be comfortable with. If you kill someone, it's unethical no matter where you do it. If eating human flesh is wrong, it makes no difference if the flesh is German or Brazilian, much less where it was actually taken from the body. If using embryos for cells is wrong - not that I am suggesting it is - it makes not a blind bit of difference where you had the embryo from.

I understand that the UK (for now) and Belgium have the most relaxed rules in the EU. See this stub for a somewhat contradictory summary.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

39. Comment #352527 by electronics on March 16, 2009 at 12:57 am

Get Flash Player

The science of healing now is developing so quickly that it has become almost a cliche to describe a particular operation as a "breakthrough". Yet there is no doubt that the first successful transplant of a human windpipe, constructed partly from stem cells,that all about it of windpipe i know...
electronics

Other Comments by electronics
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: