Quality Comparison of Decellularized Omentum Prepared by Different Protocols for Tissue Engineering Applications

Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Anatomical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Histomorphometry and Stereology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Tissue Engineering Lab, Anatomy Department, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran


Objective: Decellularized greater omentum (GOM) is a good extracellular matrix (ECM) source for regenerative medicine applications. The aim of the current study was to compare the efficiency of three protocols for sheep GOM decellularization based on sufficient DNA depletion and ECM content retention for tissue engineering application.
Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, in the first protocol, low concentrations of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS 1%), hexane, acetone, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and ethanol were used. In the second one, a high concentration of SDS (4%) and ethanol, and in the last one sodium lauryl ether sulfate (SLES 1%) were used to decellularize the GOM. To evaluate the quality of scaffold prepared with various protocols, histochemical staining, DNA, and glycosaminoglycan (GAGs) quantification, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Raman confocal microscopy, Bradford assay, and ELISA were performed.
Results: A comparison of DNA content showed that SDS-based protocols omitted DNA more efficiently than the SLESbased protocol. Histochemical staining showed that all protocols preserved the neutral carbohydrates, collagen, and elastic fibers; however, the SLES-based protocol removed the lipid droplets better than the SDS-based protocols. Although SEM images showed that all protocols preserved the ECM architecture, Raman microscopy, GAGs quantification, total protein, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) assessments revealed that SDS 1% preserved ECM more efficiently than the others.
Conclusion: The SDS 1% can be considered a superior protocol for decellularizing GOM in tissue engineering applications.


  1. Kim TH, Kim DY, Jung KH, Hong YS, Kim SY, Park JW, et al. The role of omental flap transposition in patients with locoregional recurrent rectal cancer treated with reirradiation. J Surg Oncol. 2010; 102(7): 789-795.
  2. Di Nicola V. Omentum a powerful biological source in regenerative surgery. Regen Ther. 2019; 11: 182-191.
  3. Porzionato A, Sfriso M, Macchi V, Rambaldo A, Lago G, Lancerotto L, et al. Decellularized omentum as novel biologic scaffold for reconstructive surgery and regenerative medicine. Eur J Histochem. 2013; 57(1): e4.
  4. Soffer-Tsur N, Shevach M, Shapira A, Peer D, Dvir T. Optimizing the biofabrication process of omentum-based scaffolds for engineering autologous tissues. Biofabrication. 2014; 6(3): 035023.
  5. Shevach M, Zax R, Abrahamov A, Fleischer S, Shapira A, Dvir T. Omentum ECM-based hydrogel as a platform for cardiac cell delivery. Biomed Mater. 2015; 10(3): 034106.
  6. Baker NA, Muir LA, Washabaugh AR, Neeley CK, Chen SY-P, Flesher CG, et al. Diabetes-specific regulation of adipocyte metabolism by the adipose tissue extracellular matrix. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017; 102(3): 1032-1043.
  7. Lin T, Liu S, Chen S, Qiu S, Rao Z, Liu J, et al. Hydrogel derived from porcine decellularized nerve tissue as a promising biomaterial for repairing peripheral nerve defects. Acta Biomater. 2018; 73: 326-338.
  8. Shevach M, Soffer-Tsur N, Fleischer S, Shapira A, Dvir T. Fabrication of omentum-based matrix for engineering vascularized cardiac tissues. Biofabrication. 2014; 6(2): 024101.
  9. Loreto C, Leonardi R, Musumeci G, Pannone G, Castorina S. An ex vivo study on immunohistochemical localization of MMP-7 and MMP-9 in temporomandibular joint discs with internal derangement. Eur J Histochem. 2013; 57(2): e12.
  10. Emami A, Talaei-Khozani T, Tavanafar S, Zareifard N, Azarpira N, Vojdani Z. Synergic effects of decellularized bone matrix, hydroxyapatite, and extracellular vesicles on repairing of the rabbit mandibular bone defect model. J Transl Med. 2020; 18(1): 1-18.
  11. Porzionato A, Stocco E, Barbon S, Grandi F, Macchi V, De Caro R. Tissue-engineered grafts from human decellularized extracellular matrices: a systematic review and future perspectives. Int J Mol Sci. 2018; 19(12): 4117.
  12. Crapo PM, Gilbert TW, Badylak SF. An overview of tissue and whole organ decellularization processes. Biomaterials. 2011; 32(12): 3233-3243.
  13. Hoshiba T, Lu H, Kawazoe N, Chen G. Decellularized matrices for tissue engineering. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2010; 10(12): 1717- 1728.
  14. Yang B, Zhang Y, Zhou L, Sun Z, Zheng J, Chen Y, et al. Development of a porcine bladder acellular matrix with well-preserved extracellular bioactive factors for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2010; 16(5): 1201-1211.
  15. Shupe T, Williams M, Brown A, Willenberg B, Petersen BE. Method for the decellularization of intact rat liver. Organogenesis. 2010; 6(2): 134-136.
  16. Lumpkins SB, Pierre N, McFetridge PS. A mechanical evaluation of three decellularization methods in the design of a xenogeneic scaffold for tissue engineering the temporomandibular joint disc. Acta Biomater. 2008; 4(4): 808-816.
  17. Hassanpour A, Talaei-Khozani T, Kargar-Abarghouei E, Razban V, Vojdani Z. Decellularized human ovarian scaffold based on a sodium lauryl ester sulfate (SLES)-treated protocol, as a natural three-dimensional scaffold for construction of bioengineered ovaries. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2018; 9(1): 252.
  18. Geerts S, Ozer S, Jaramillo M, Yarmush ML, Uygun BE. Nondestructive methods for monitoring cell removal during rat liver decellularization. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2016; 22(7): 671-678.
  19. Valipour Nouroozi R, Valipour Noroozi M, Ahmadizadeh M. Determination of protein concentration using bradford microplate protein quantification assay. Int Electron J Med. 2015; 4(1): 11-17.
  20. Gilpin A, Yang Y. Decellularization strategies for regenerative medicine: from processing techniques to applications. Biomed Res Int. 2017; 2017: 9831534.
  21. Talari ACS, Movasaghi Z, Rehman S, Rehman IU. Raman spectroscopy of biological tissues. Appl Spectrosc Rev. 2015; 50(1): 46-111.
  22. Movasaghi Z, Rehman S, Rehman IU. Raman spectroscopy of biological tissues. Appl Spectrosc Rev. 2007; 42(5): 493-541.
  23. Xing Q, Yates K, Tahtinen M, Shearier E, Qian Z, Zhao F. Decellularization of fibroblast cell sheets for natural extracellular matrix scaffold preparation. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2014; 21(1): 77- 87.
  24. Kargar-Abarghouei E, Vojdani Z, Hassanpour A, Alaee S, Talaei- Khozani T. Characterization, recellularization, and transplantation of rat decellularized testis scaffold with bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2018; 9(1): 1-16.
  25. Ma J, Ju Z, Yu J, Qiao Y, Hou C, Wang C, et al. Decellularized ratlung scaffolds using sodium lauryl ether sulfate for tissue engineering. Asaio J. 2018; 64(3): 406-414.
  26. Naeem EM, Sajad D, Talaei-Khozani T, Khajeh S, Azarpira N, Alaei S, et al. Decellularized liver transplant could be recellularized in rat partial hepatectomy model. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2019; 107(11): 2576-2588.
  27. Linhardt RJ, Toida T. Role of glycosaminoglycans in cellular communication. Acc Chem Res. 2004; 37(7): 431-438.
  28. Ott HC, Clippinger B, Conrad C, Schuetz C, Pomerantseva I, Ikonomou L, et al. Regeneration and orthotopic transplantation of a bioartificial lung. Nat Med. 2010; 16(8): 927-933.
  29. Reing JE, Brown BN, Daly KA, Freund JM, Gilbert TW, Hsiong SX, et al. The effects of processing methods upon mechanical and biologic properties of porcine dermal extracellular matrix scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2010; 31(33): 8626-8633.
  30. Wang J, Jia R, Wang J, Sun Z, Wu Z, Liu R, et al. Investigation on the interaction of catalase with sodium lauryl sulfonate and the underlying mechanisms. J Biochem Mol Toxicol. 2018; 32(2): e22025.
  31. Gholami M, Zare-Hoseinabadi A, Mohammadi M, Taghizadeh S, Behbahani AB, Amani AM, et al. Preparation of ZnXFe3-XO4@ chitosan nanoparticles as an adsorbent for methyl orange and phenol. J Environ Treat Tech. 2019; 7(3): 245-249.
  32. Schwarz S, Koerber L, Elsaesser AF, Goldberg-Bockhorn E, Seitz AM, Dürselen L, et al. Decellularized cartilage matrix as a novel biomatrix for cartilage tissue-engineering applications. Tissue Eng Part A. 2012; 18(21-22): 2195-2209.
  33. Schmitt A, Csiki R, Tron A, Saldamli B, Tübel J, Florian K, et al. Optimized protocol for whole organ decellularization. Eur J Med Res. 2017; 22(1): 1-9.
  34. Omidi E, Fuetterer L, Mousavi SR, Armstrong RC, Flynn LE, Samani A. Characterization and assessment of hyperelastic and elastic properties of decellularized human adipose tissues. J Biomech. 2014; 47(15): 3657-3663.
  35. Hassanpour A, Talaei-Khozani T, Kargar-Abarghouei E, Razban V, Vojdani Z. Decellularized human ovarian scaffold based on a sodium lauryl ester sulfate (SLES)-treated protocol, as a natural three-dimensional scaffold for construction of bioengineered ovaries. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2018; 9(1): 1-13.
  36. Chung EJ, Ju HW, Yeon YK, Lee JS, Lee YJ, Seo YB, et al. Development of an omentum-cultured oesophageal scaffold reinforced by a 3D-printed ring: feasibility of an in vivo bioreactor. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol. 2018; 46 Suppl1: 885-895.
  37. Buyukdogan K, Doral MN, Bilge O, Turhan E, Huri G, Sargon MF. Peritoneum and omentum are natural reservoirs for chondrocytes of osteochondral autografts: a comparative animal study. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2016; 50(5): 539-543.
  38. Collins D, Hogan AM, O’Shea D, Winter DC. The omentum: anatomical, metabolic, and surgical aspects. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009; 13(6): 1138-1146.
  39. Kant RJ, Coulombe KL. Integrated approaches to spatiotemporally directing angiogenesis in host and engineered tissues. Acta Biomater. 2018; 69: 42-62.