ACell

[hairtech]

There has been a recent increase in the use of ACell in hair transplantation. However ACell has been used in many different environments. I ran across an article in "Scientific America" stating the use of ACell also known as a porcine powder (pig bladder ground up into a dust), that actually helped to re-grow lost fingers and limbs from amputees. It struck a cord in me as this is an unusual claim, so I looked up the company for a historical prospective. Here is the Wikipedia article...



Acell Incorporated is a Jessup, Maryland-based biotechnology company. They work in regenerative medicine, in which they own several valuable extracellular matrix patents.[1][/suP] They develop, manufacture and market products for medical and veterinary applications.[2][/suP] The company is founded by Alan R. Spievack, a former associate professor at Harvard Medical School and currently run by Jim Defrancesco.[3][/suP]

Their use of porcine cellular structure, called MatriStem, as a scaffold for human tissue regeneration was named the "medical breakthrough of the year byEsquire.[4][/suP] The use of pig bladder ground up into "magical pixie dust" to regrow Spievak's brother's finger received considerable mainstream coverage.[5][/suP][6][/suP] Ken Muneoka of Tulane University, who works with ACell's scientific advisors on US-government funded investigations into regenerative medicine, said that the news should be viewed with caution because it was not a controlled study.[4][/suP]

References

1. ^ "ACell wins extracellular matrix patent battle initiated by Cook Biotech and Purdue.". BIOTECH Patent News (August, 2006). 2006-08-01. Retrieved 2008-05-01. [/*]
2. ^ "Acell Inc. completes $6M round of financing". The Daily Record. Retrieved 2008-05-01. [/*]
3. ^ "Reborn, ACell enters medical wound healing". Maryland Gazette. Retrieved 2008-05-01. [/*]
4. ^ a[/suP] b[/suP] "No. 3: Medical Breakthrough of the Year". Esquire. Retrieved 2008-05-01. [/*]
5. ^ "Man regrew finger - with pig powder?". New York Daily News. Retrieved 2008-05-01. [/*]
6. ^ Price, Matthew (2008-04-30). "The man who grew a finger". BBC. Retrieved 2008-05-01.

[/*]
Please offer your opinions, concerns, or questions...



And BTW here are a couple articles of its uses:

CNN article 2010:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/09/09/pinky.regeneration.surgery/index.html?hpt=C2


Omaha.com article 2010:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100509/NEWS01/705099851

 

[mars]

Hey tom,i seen a video on youtube last yr from an oprah show where it was being called pixie dust,it regrew the top of this mans finger i think it was the first case,oprahs first question was..you guessed it will it grow hair on a bald mans head.

One question i have is have you seen any real benefits of acell with regard to hairtransplants other than quicker healing?i dont get the hype around acell,i dont ever see it doing much personally.

 

[hairtech]

Good question indeed mars. I read about the "pixie dust" used in the amputees. It sort of helped grow a limb by accident. Then the field exploded with its uses. Dr. Cooley was probably first to bring it into the hair transplant industry. And other doctors, i.e. Cole and Shapiro brothers have included it into their protocol.

As far as results go Cooley has published his positive experiences with ACell in a journal. We started to include ACell as an option if the patient wants it. We have used it for less than a year.

 

[mars]

Would love to see even one patient posting positive results in terms of hair growth from plucking with acell not a doctor posting results,havent seen one yet nor do i expect to,i have higher hopes for histogen.

 

[hairtech]

Ya I agree mars. It's too early at the moment for our clinic. I actually wish there was an absolute concrete way of knowing if ACell is working altogether. Unfortunately this field of medicine is unpredictable.

What have you gathered from histogen? I am unfamiliar.

 

[mars]

I listened to an interview on the baldtruth with spencer and the president of histogen a lady by the name gail naughton if my memory serves me correctly their clinical trials have been in cmsq on the scalp rather than a larger area and the results showed an increase in hair counts of upto 75% but again this is only in one squared cm of the scalp,phase 2 or 3 clinical trials(not sure which) are due to take place in singapore and japan rather than the states because it is quicker and cheaper,these trials are in the near future i think.

The science of this if i can remember and explain it correctly is as follows:

Etract a very small piece of scalp tissue or individual follicles,divide the cells in an enviroment that mimics embryonic conditions such as a specific tempeture,lower gravity etc..nourture the cells until ready for implantation via injections all over the desired area,no outside growth factors used and is 100% your own cells,if/when it grows hair it will also make existing non terminal hair terminal.Potential problems hair direction and hair pigment(white).

Not the greatest explanation and their is a ALOT more to it obviously but thats the jist of it.

Their are a photos histogen realesed last yr i wil do a search for them.

 

[mars]

http://www.hairlosshelp.com/FORUMS/messageview.cfm?catid=10&threadid=89422&highlight_key=y

 

[mars]

http://www.histogen.com can't post a link to the website.

 

[hairtech]

Ok so embryonic conditions are not solely based on temperature and low gravity. Here is a quick basic low down on this science. Embryonic cells are what are called pluripotent cells. Pluripotent embryonic cells are cells that are going to become everything from eyes to finger nails to hair follicles. Now if the company of Histogen is able to take a piece of scalp... find embryonic pluripotent cells... isolate them... incubate them... (in embryonic conditions as stated above) this would be a notable break through in hair transplantation.

 

[karmenelec]

Hairtech, I'm afraid that FUE will soon be the laserdisc of HTs.

Take a gander at the recent publication from Hair Transplant International. In particular, read Cole's naysaying, and Cooley's response. This is the real deal my friend. Cooley's reputation for honesty, integrity and advancing the field of hair restoration is unrivaled.

Very soon FUE extractions will be replaced by plucking. No more depleted donor.

http://nyhairloss.com/wp-content/uploads/Hitzig_Article.pdf

Dr. Cooley's response:

I understand why Dr. Cole is confused. In fact, I was quite
confused for a long time about the plucked graft technique
developed by Dr. Gary Hitzig. When I wrote in my 2006 Co-
Editors €™ Message that Dr. Hitzig was able to pluck intact follicles,
I was wrong. It only appeared that way to me using the
stereomicroscope. The key to understanding this controversy is
the dermal sheath.
I have now plucked many thousands of hairs in the course of
refining and developing this technique. I have examined them
not only with the stereomicroscope but also histologically and
microscopically with special stains (1% Dimethylaminocinnamaldehyde).
The following has become very clear: The plucked
hair follicle contains the inner and outer root sheath (epithelial
cells) and sometimes the dermal papilla (mesenchymal origin)
but never, in my experience, the dermal sheath. The dermal
sheath is a practically invisible layer of mesenchmal cells that
envelops the hair follicle, and in its lower section is thought to be
a reservoir of mesenchymal stem cells that supplies the dermal
papilla in much the same way that the €œbulge € is the source of
stem cells for matrix keratinocytes. The dermal sheath is always
left behind after plucking. What is thought to occur is that, after a
hair is plucked, the dermal sheath reconstitutes the dermal papilla
and the bulge stem cells reconstitute all the epithelial layers of
the follicle, thus allowing hair to regrow.
Ever since humans developed self-awareness and opposable
thumbs, they have likely been plucking hair from their bodies.
Much to their consternation, the hair regrows. If I had a special
plucking technique that completely removed the hair follicle, I
would be redirecting much of my practice toward permanent hair
removal, which would likely be very lucrative for me judging
by the insatiable desire people have to get rid of unwanted hair.
Sadly, or fortunately, depending on how you look at it, this is
not the case. Neither I, nor Dr. Hitzig, have ever seen permanent
thinning in areas that were plucked. Since the dermal sheath
and some epithelial stem cells are left behind after plucking,
the hair follicle regenerates and hair regrows. Trichotillomania
is a biological model for repeated plucking so we can see what
happens over time. Many children have this common behavior
disorder and never develop permanent hair loss. It is only after
years of repeated plucking that permanent alopecia develops,
probably from depletion of epithelial stem cells. The autocloning
technique does not promise unlimited donor hair, but it does hold
the possibility of a greatly expanded donor supply.
What interests me is that Dr. Cole says there is no evidence
for hair duplication yet he doesn €™t really explain the histologic
data I presented. Looking at the rather coarse hair growing in
isolation on a bald crown, and seeing the vertical histologic section
of this hair with its apparent normal follicular architecture
is indeed a piece of evidence. There are only three possible
explanations: 1) it €™s a fraud (I grafted a whisker harvested by
FUE and am saying it was plucked); 2) it €™s from a plucked intact
follicle (which is impossible because as discussed above, the
dermal sheath cannot be €œplucked €); or 3) it €™s what I say it is,
a regenerated follicle from a plucked partial hair follicle. The
dermal sheath and sebaceous gland is present and must have been
regenerated in situ. This data is supported by a second biopsy
where a 4-hair unit is seen with horizontal sectioning. Considering
that this was created by implanting four beard whiskers
into a site in the balding crown, where only highly miniaturized
1- and 2-hair units were present, it €™s a rather remarkable result. Again, all the normal components of follicular architecture are
present. If this isn €™t evidence, what is it? Yes, of course, large
blinded studies would be nice. But these are very difficult for the
unfunded solo doctors to carry out in their private practices, and
they are especially difficult in the field of surgical hair restoration.
In fact, I €™m not aware of any €œevidence based medicine € study
that has had any significant effect on the day-to-day practice of
the hair surgeon. We change and evolve through hearing case
presentations and technique descriptions from our colleagues,
and then trying these out in our own practices. This is the milieu
in which the autocloning technique will live or die and this, of
course, takes time.
Regarding the name €”autocloning €”there is no double entendre
here, only one entendre. Webster €™s Dictionary defines a
€œclone € as one that appears to be a copy of an original form; duplicate
is a synonym of clone. It is derived from the Greek word
klōn, meaning twig. The word arose in the horticulture world,
where the creation of a new plant from a twig of the original
was called cloning. This is very similar to the hair autocloning
technique, where auto (self) cloning (copying) occurs by plucking
a €œtwig € of hair from the mother follicle to create daughter
follicles. Cloning in scientific usage may also be applied to
disparate laboratory techniques involving DNA, cells, or whole
organisms. In scientific circles, it is not generally used to refer
to somatic cell therapy. Implanting cultured dermal papilla to
regenerate follicles is not €œcloning, € as has been explained many
times in the past.
The actual clinical significance of the autocloning technique
remains to be determined. How successful, how durable, etc., are
important questions that must be answered before a consensus is
reached. But as far as I am concerned, these preliminary clinical
and histologic observations have weathered their first round of
criticism quite nicely.

 

[hairtech]

Karm,

I read that response. It first came out in an industry magazine and then online. I am all for the newer technologies coming out. And Cooley has a special place in the hair transplant industry... so does Ron Shapiro, Jim Harris, John Cole... They all have a foot print in this industry. Cooley is more on the research side. Pushing the envelope on different ideas that he is trying. Ron Shapiro has over the past 20 years focused on hairline development, etc. etc. Jim Harris has developed his own way of extracting grafts by way of FUE that is different from everyone else. John Cole and his staff has brought FUE to the forefront many years ago. And there are others... such as Umar who I myself battld with online but he has become the forefron of BHT. And again there are others.

As far as FUE going away anytime soon... probably not... and neither is the strip going anywhere... not yet... good post Karm.