Cited by 99Tissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineTracheal and airway disorders3D Printing in Biomedical Research

Vacuum-assisted decellularization: an accelerated protocol to generate tissue-engineered human tracheal scaffolds

Open access
Butler, Colin R., Hynds, Robert E., Crowley, Claire, Gowers, Kate H.C., Partington, Leanne, Hamilton, Nicholas J., Carvalho, Carla, Platé, Manuela +7 more·2017·Biomaterials

Abstract

Patients with large tracheal lesions unsuitable for conventional endoscopic or open operations may require a tracheal replacement but there is no present consensus of how this may be achieved. Tissue engineering using decellularized or synthetic tracheal scaffolds offers a new avenue for airway reconstruction. Decellularized human donor tracheal scaffolds have been applied in compassionate-use clinical cases but naturally derived extracellular matrix (ECM) scaffolds demand lengthy preparation times. Here, we compare a clinically applied detergent-enzymatic method (DEM) with an accelerated vacuum-assisted decellularization (VAD) protocol. We examined the histological appearance, DNA content and extracellular matrix composition of human donor tracheae decellularized using these techniques. Further, we performed scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and biomechanical testing to analyze decellularization performance. To assess the biocompatibility of scaffolds generated using VAD, we seeded scaffolds with primary human airway epithelial cells in vitro and performed in vivo chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) and subcutaneous implantation assays. Both DEM and VAD protocols produced well-decellularized tracheal scaffolds with no adverse mechanical effects and scaffolds retained the capacity for in vitro and in vivo cellular integration. We conclude that the substantial reduction in time required to produce scaffolds using VAD compared to DEM (approximately 9 days vs. 3-8 weeks) does not compromise the quality of human tracheal scaffold generated. These findings might inform clinical decellularization techniques as VAD offers accelerated scaffold production and reduces the associated costs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.02.001

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Vacuum-assisted decellularization, employing negative pressure to expedite the process, can be utilized in conjunction with other techniques to enhance outcomes.

    “Vacuum‐assisted decellularization, employing negative pressure to expedite the process, can be utilized in conjunction with other techniques to enhance outcomes.”

    From Bioactive scaffolds for tissue engineering: A review of decellularized extracellular matrix applications and innovations (2025) · cites this paper as [67]

    The Materials and methods section describes applying a vacuum of 1 Torr alongside detergent and enzyme treatments. The Discussion reports that this protocol shortened preparation of human tracheal scaffolds to nine days, versus 3–8 weeks for the comparator, while producing comparable scaffold quality. It does not establish that combining vacuum assistance with other techniques improves scaffold outcomes beyond that acceleration. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

3 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [17]Jungebluth P. Alici E. Baiguera S. Blomberg P. Bozoky B. Crowley C. Einarsson O. Gudbjartsson T. Le Guyader S. Henriksson G. Hermanson O. Juto J.E. Leidner B. Lilja T. Liska J. Luedde T. Lundin V. Moll G. Roderburg C. Stromblad S. Sutlu T. Watz E. Seifalian A. Macchiarini P. Tracheobronchial transplantation with a stem-cell-seeded bioartificial nanocomposite: a proof-of-concept study Lancet 378 9808 2011 1997 2004 22119609

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Butler, C. R., Hynds, R. E., Crowley, C., Gowers, K. H. C., Partington, L., Hamilton, N. J., Carvalho, C., Platé, M., Samuel, E. R., Burns, A. J., Urbani, L., Birchall, M. A., Lowdell, M. W., De Coppi, P., & Janes, S. M.
Affiliations
  • Great Ormond Street Hospital (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
  • Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Janes, Sam M.
Venue
Biomaterials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
124
Pages
95-105
ISSN
0142-9612 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2587160918
Cited by
99
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8
FWCI
9.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biomaterials (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • MRC Regenvox (G1001539)
  • MRC-funded RegenVOX II clinical trial (MR/K026453/1)
  • Wellcome Senior Fellow in Clinical Science (WT107963AIA)
  • The Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation
  • Charitable Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Tracheal and airway disorders
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Keywords
decellularized extracellular matrix, tracheal replacement, airway reconstruction, biocompatibility, chick chorioallantoic membrane assay, subcutaneous implantation, tissue mechanics, DNA content
MeSH terms
Cell Fractionation, Cell-Free System, Cells, Cultured, Equipment Design, Extracellular Matrix, Humans, Trachea, Vacuum, Equipment Failure Analysis, Tissue Engineering, Tissue Scaffolds

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review